What you could be experiencing is an increase in heat convection, which would mean the water wetter is increasing the cooling system’s efficiency. The increased temperature is actually a good indicator that water wetter is doing what it’s supposed to The coolant is picking up more heat from the engine and thus the sensor is displaying the increased coolant temperature. Ex: If you put a kettle on a stove grab a pair of mitts and touch the kettle it’s not very hot. But if you wet the mitts and then touch the hot kettle it’s going to feel considerably hotter Your coolant sensor is effectively experiencing wet mitts and so it’s displaying a higher temperature
@@dirtygarageguy The temperature with water wetter is higher. So ww is doing "something". It's not inert. That heat is coming from somewhere...more calories are being transferred from the metal to the liquid. Presumably, since the cooling fins on the radiator are metal, then the reverse must also be true, and the fins will be hotter.
I always thought the water wetter was just for corrosion inhibition when using water (never used it). Its better to be used on track if you got leak for some reason then there wont be any glycol on the track. Additives on it may lower its surface tension and help it to cool better but that might be a minor effect.
do 70/30 mix also in your next test. from what i read in the automotive forum, water wetter not reduce your engine/radiator temperature but make engine cool down faster. i used 70/30 mix ratio with 4 caps water wetter for my 185cc small bike (my bike use 1L coolant). i live in Southeast Asia, the weather always hot and humid. i can feel my bike cool down faster than before i used water wetter because i can hear my radiator fan turn off quickly.
Overall pretty thorough testing with great data. To me I feel it's snake oil. It's like adding coolant to coolant 😂. Modern day coolant already has detergents, anticorrosion inhibitors and distilled/deionized water. On the other hand using this with just pure water may yield more interesting results. The thing to consider is your cooling system operating and control. The fan and thermostat control heat, while "coolant" is pressurized to resist boiling. The same principle works for water as well. It may be easier to clean up for track related applications using water wetter.
Shake bottle if it forms bubbles and take forever for bubbles to go away its not a good cooling additive the good ones are when u shake the bottle the bubbles go away right away
If you’re not interested in the lower part of the graph as you state why are you waiting until the engine is at ambient temp before retesting? If you when it was at for instance 60deg you could get more tests done in one day.
fair test - and incase something weird happens. After looking at the graph then I decided I wasn't bothered. You have to be open to the possibility that something may happen that you didn't plan for. Showing the entire graph also shows you're not hiding anything. Companies are always plotting data to give the best outcome.
The only way I can see it make a difference is in higher ambient temperatures like Arizona, when you use the 100% water, and only then if your cooling system is struggling to lose enough heat. The chemical engineer in me says the only way you’ll improve the cooling is to either pass more air through the radiator or have a bigger radiator. In the UK the only way to change the temperature is to put a different thermostat in!
Yes! I use WW in Memphis/TN and it makes a marginal difference. (That I can definitely feel as I don't get my manhood cooked in the summertime waiting a light to turn green)
I like your effort but personally I feel your test if flawed. I'm def. no expert but I'm just adding common reasoning to what I expected to happen with that wetter stuff. The whole idea of adding it is to reduce or remove the surface tension of the water so it can remove heat better. By magic or what ever who cares. So it seemed to do by those charts you showed. It may also improve a radiator by the same logic. It will not make a car or bike cooler while sitting still though. You should have ran a constant air speed though the radiator and ran the motor to see if it's in use temp cooled faster. That graph showed it was actually working as intended.
Oh and I'm yet to see any data on why surface tension is a block volume of coolant changes anything in regards to the specific heat capacity of water with or without WW added......
@@dirtygarageguy I wonder about heat capacity or just absorbing heat faster and a big if to if it makes the radiator work better giving better contact to the water/alum. to remove heat faster??
@@dirtygarageguynope. More heat is in liquid without boiling, less on metal. You want liquid to transfer more heat being cooler? Hmmmm.... :D I would calculate time of open thermostat cycles, and degrees delta, dropping down coolant temp. Would convert that to energy ammount system gave away.. And in garage, in same ambient temperature. Not this playground test.
@@LightBeyondOfSpeed less on metal... His temp probe was ON THE METAL of the cylinder head. The metal temp was higher with the water wetter. That's a fail no matter how you try to slice it. If the coolant temp was higher but the cylinder head temp was lower, you'd have a point, but that wasn't the case.
I would suspect the cooling system thermostat is responsible for the maximum recorded temperature regardless of what the coolant fluid is or fluid composition is or where the temperature is sensed. The range of disparity between the HOBO and the on-board temp indication would greatly depend on the location of the coolant temperature sensor and the placement of the thermocouple and the thermal conduction of the thermocouple at the substrate junction. The oscillation of the recorded temp is indicative of the coolant thermal currents, coolant thermostat opening and closing and or the cooling fan cycling. For what it is worth, WaterWetter does have its place with certain applications. We have used it in automotive applications where the track facility and or the sanctioning body prohibited the use of any Glycol based coolant fluid and mandated water only. Water only cools OK, but promotes corrosion and an additive such as WaterWetter helps with mitigating corrosion.
"I would suspect the cooling system thermostat is responsible for the maximum recorded temperature regardless of what the coolant fluid is or fluid composition is or where the temperature is sensed." The coolant temperature as you can see from the video hovers around 100DegC this is way above the thermostat temp of 84 ~ 89DegC - the up and down is the fan coming on and off. You obviously don't understand how a thermostat works - so I'll be doing a video. "The range of disparity between the HOBO and the on-board temp indication would greatly depend on the location of the coolant temperature sensor and the placement of the thermocouple and the thermal conduction of the thermocouple at the substrate junction. " - And this is what I did say. The 2 temperatures are different. I also said that this is not an absolute temperature. But this does matter, as long as the recorded temperature methods are the same in locations and testing equiptment - which they are. "where the track facility and or the sanctioning body prohibited the use of any Glycol based coolant fluid and mandated water only." - who in racing is bothered about corrosion? Cna you actually name any?
+The Workshop "The coolant temperature as you can see from the video hovers around 100DegC this is way above the thermostat temp of 84 ~ 89DegC - the up and down is the fan coming on and off." After quickly studying this specific Suzuki configuration, set points and operation I now get it and you are correct. This is how cooling system thermostats work... begin opening when the temp of the thermostat wax reaches the rated temp (~88 C in this case), open fully when the wax temp is consistently held above the rated temperature and begin closing when the wax temp falls bellow the rated temp, cycle as coolant temp dictates. The fluid temperature surrounding the thermostat wax reservoir determines the state of the thermostat. In this case, sitting stationary without sufficient forced airflow through the radiator, yes the fan dictates the maximum cooling system temperature which is dictated by the thermo-switch in the radiator inlet tank that is fixed to close (fan on) at ~105C and open (fan off) at ~100C. While in motion (cruising above ~30 km/h) with most production cooling systems the radiator heat transfer/dissipation is great enough to lower the circulating engine coolant temperature sufficiently for the thermostat to cycle. -- "You obviously don't understand how a thermostat works - so I'll be doing a video." While I understand how a thermostat works, I was not previously aware of the configuration, set points and operation of this specific Suzuki. Please do make a video, maybe I and other viewers will learn something. "- And this is what I did say. The 2 temperatures are different. I also said that this is not an absolute temperature. But this does matter, as long as the recorded temperature methods are the same in locations and testing equiptment - which they are." I was agreeing with you... -- "- who in racing is bothered about corrosion? Cna you actually name any?" Yes, me and most of my clients. -- Was the HOBO thermocouple attachment/sense point on the front cylinder bank cam drive idler shaft cap? Thank you for your time and effort. Cheers.
The video I watched they added distilled water, Couldn't understand how it would work with such a little amount added, just shows if manufacturers aren't using it there really isn't a need for it. Cheers Mat we ask you deliver.
I would put a dab of heat transfer compound between the engine and the thermocouple, I do temperature data logging in work too . I would be suspicious of the baseline test result but a good vid matt
Like I said, what I'm mainly concerned about is two things. The difference when the engine reaches over 100DegC and is water wetter cooler than normal 50/50. The conclusion I have at present is no, water wetter isn't cooler. Due to the variables I can't say it runs hotter, but if it were cooler then it should be at least the same, if not cooler. The fact that it was raining when I did the test means that it should have performed better. More on this in the next test which I believe is better.
I'm certainly not claiming to be the great and powerful OZ here, but maybe consider the analysis of your results in the following way: The coolant temperature became hotter faster. The capacity of the coolant system to give up heat to the ambient did not increase(no increase in fan cfm or radiator size) The engine was idling and making waste heat at the same rate in both instances. The conclusion should be that the heat transfer of the coolant was increased because it is taking more heat from the engine and becoming hotter. The consideration not being appreciated here is that if the coolant is hotter(and nothing else is changing), the actual metal of the engine has to be cooler because the coolant is able to "steal" more heat at an increased rate. The temp sensors measure the coolant jacket and not the actual cylinder head temperature. The coolant is only hotter because the fan/radiator can't shed the additional BTU's put into the coolant any faster. The only thing that can drive increased heat transfer to the ambient air is a greater temperature difference between the coolant and the ambient air, that's how/why the coolant temp is increasing. Additionally, the dead zone in initial change is due to the thermal mass of the engine absorbing the heat being generated, the temperature difference between the engine metal and coolant has to occur before heat transfer to the coolant begins.
Dude. Everything I've read says it works better when glycol is not present. I used it and it dropped my hard running temperature by 12 degrees fahrenheit. The reason I used it , is because in my area (Florida, United States ) the racetracks require you not to run antifreeze because crashes can result in spills on the track, which it's very slippery, causing a dangerous situation for everyone behind you. I believe your test is not valid because you didn't use clean distilled water and water wetter. I've only ever bought one bottle of the stuff and I haven't ridden in about 10 years. My point in saying this, is just to point out that I'm not a fanboy or am I in anyway connected to the company that makes it. But I do know for a fact that on my almost brand new Honda, that the product worked as stated on the bottle.
Also idling and free revving a motorcycle is not even close to what temperatures it will reach under full throttle loads, with very minimal off throttle time. Im a fan of yours and enjoy your videos, but I gotta disagree with this test.
Under full load the bike is moving. And 12deg F is 7 deg C (ish) that's nothing either way. 7deg could be the difference between days )(temp humidity etc) Water wetter is an additive package, that's all. It's the water that does the cooling and is better than 50/50 at doing so.
Also read what they actually say - which is what this experiment was about. "compatible with new or used antifreeze (including DEX-COOL® and long-life versions) to improve the heat transfer of ethylene and propylene glycol systems" www.redlineoil.com/waterwetter
I also feel like 12 degrees is pretty significant when your at the higher end of the operating temp range. My butt dyno can feel the different between acceptable and on the edge of overheating and I know yours can too.
I had a digital gauge in my truck. Noticed a 6°F drop using water wetter. If i remember right without antifreeze gives you better results according to the label but thats for race purposes only i guess.
Yes and it should - water is the best coolant there is - the water wetter did nothing - however the corrosion experiment I'm doing at the moment is promising in regards to water wetter
Career pilot here... 20 bucks says pure distilled water provides the best cooling, but shortens service life of cooling system components. (that's why the P-51D Flight Manual specifies 50/50 mix of water/glycol, aka Prestone). MachOverspeed
I think the product claims are only valid for the conditions of mixed with 100% de-ionized water, for use on surfaces that prohibit use of coolants, like certain racetracks or concurs venues.
Ended up watching this after viewing the Evans videos. I like the videos and appreciate your thought process, but take issue with the assessment of the water wetter product. Your video only proved that the bike's cooling system stayed within its operating range during an extended idle period. To test the product claims one would need to apply a significant load to the engine, time how long it took the cooling system to reach an upper operating temperature and then repeat the test with the water wetter added along with identical climate and load. I suspect you would have a positive outcome. Water wetter is a surfactant and corrosion inhibitor for water. Science has repeatedly shown that surfactants / wetting agents can improve heat transfer between fluids and solids. In this case the water surfactant acts as a flux agent, reducing the vapor barrier that can exist between water and high temperature surfaces. This vapor barrier and its impact on heat transfer are known as the Leidenfrost effect. Research continues, but many advances were tied to steam engine technology. My personal experience with the product was on an antique car with a flathead engine. The cooling system had been marginal for years and after completely flushing the block and restoring the system to near original, it cooled adequately with plain water. After a short while I added the water wetter, primarily for anti-corrosion and water pump lubrication benefits since freezing temperatures were rare in Florida. Afterwards, the cooling system was rock steady whether idling, in traffic, or on the highway and it ran 10 degrees (F) cooler than with water alone.
"To test the product claims one would need to apply a significant load to the engine, time how long it took the cooling system to reach an upper operating temperature and then repeat the test with the water wetter added along with identical climate and load. I suspect you would have a positive outcome." - I was about to reply to this, then read the next bit... "Water wetter is a surfactant and corrosion inhibitor for water." - Exactly correct. "This vapor barrier and its impact on heat transfer are known as the Leidenfrost effect." - Nucleate boiling and the leidenfrost effect as not the same thing, and whilst I agree surface tension plays it's part what you have to consider here is coolant volume, thermal load, flow rates and the sensitivity of the system. All these experiments on nucleate boiling and Leidenfrost effect have been in stantic systems. "and water pump lubrication" - Lubrication against what? " Afterwards, the cooling system was rock steady whether idling, in traffic, or on the highway and it ran 10 degrees (F) cooler than with water alone." - This IO don't believe, and I'll be testing it on the road soon, but with actual data, not just heresay.
@@dirtygarageguy I mentioned the Leidenfrost effect as well as steam engine technology to highlight the fact that this is treading old ground. There is no need to debate the nuances of heat capacity, thermal flux, film or nucleate boiling, vapor barrier and surface tension. Neither of us is wearing a white coat in a clean room or working on earth-shattering energy theories. Water wetter will have no appreciable impact on cooling systems that maintain normal operating temperature regardless of load. Surfactants do not alter the temperature a thermostat opens or change the laws of thermodynamics, but they can and do improve water's ability to transfer heat. To witness any benefit, a threshold temperature above the normal range would need to be measured against time while identically testing both a water control and water with additive. An interesting experiment - pull the thermostat from an engine, put it under load and time how long it takes to reach an given temperature with each scenario run several times and averaged. In the case of my 1950's car, the thermostat and temperature probe were on distant ends of the engine. Despite cleaning, after decades of corrosion, erosion, contamination and scale buildup, the cooling system read higher than the thermostat setting. The water and additive mix lowered the sensor temperature reading. If the thermostat was 175F and the gauge read 195F with water, yet consistently read 185F with the additive, it's hard to chalk that up to placebo effect. Is it something of a crutch? Yes. But if it helps a vehicle with marginal cooling capacity run within the normal range, or improves cooling when towing or running an engine hard for an extended period, is that really a bad thing?
Seems like a good test, I just have one concern. I may be wrong but the purpose of water weter is to raise the specific heat of water so it can absorb more heat and then get rid of it faster. If this is the case wouldn't the biggest change be after the water has went threw the radiator and gave off all it's heat? And at an idle shouldn't the engine temp be the same regardless of the coolant due to the thermostat regulating engine temp? Idk that's just kinda how I thought it worked but I could be wrong, man keep em coming. Really enjoy the vids
" I may be wrong but the purpose of water weter is to raise the specific heat of water so it can absorb more heat and then get rid of it faster." - this is what they say; "Superior heat transfer properties compared to glycol-based antifreeze" - which could be interpreted that way and i think this is shite, but there is an experiment on the way that will lest this. But to re-cap. In the experiment we are measuring the temperature of the head. If the coolant is better at 'cooling' then the head temperature should be lower. We didn't see this.
Do you have an explanation about why the cooling fan is kicking in at a higher temperature in the additive graphs please? Why is it not kicking in and out at the same temperature? The fan sensor has a fixed temperature when it kicks in, regardless of what type of coolant is in use. Thanks
I have been to a few track days where guys have used the product and most of them reported a slightly lower temp. I have not tested it myself yet. Maybe I should in the summer with the track car. 328 E36. And it gets hot in CPT in summer. 36 C ambient is not unusual.
Engines run cooler because they are running water not 50/50. Water is the best (apart from ammonia) fluid to use. They use WW because it is not a glycol based anti-freeze
05' WR450 here, I know pure distilled water is best for cooling but no protection, can I just run pure water and watter wetter for protection??. I do hear that 50/50 antifreeze lubricates water pump and other parts that water wetter may lack though..
@@dirtygarageguy I was told Antifreeze is also a lubricant for your engine that ensures various parts, like the water pump seals, and other parts to move smoothly. In doing so, it reduces friction, which can cause damage to your engine... Not sure if I'll just keep the 50/50 glycol mix or just water and water wetter, I'll think about it..
yes, so i bought a full sc project exhaust so i was thinking while the whole exhaust is of can i start the bike up and give it a few revs with no exhaust. is it safe?
I just tried water wetter in my car it worked good. My gauge is usually between 90-95° cel mark I drive around after pouring a third of the bottle in my coolant resivoir my car cools periodically it cycles and goes down to the 80degree mark. It will stay a little then go back and you prob added a teaspoon you just idled it in ur garage and sucked up petrol fumes and said "hey guys it don't fooken work mate
Water Wetter is MOSTLY for corrosion preventing purposes in a racecar. Antifreeze is as slick, and banned from some racing. Thus. Water wetter (not slick, very basic chemical make up) And yes. In a non thermostatically controlled system. It does work.
I know this has nothing to do with your video but I thought since nobody else wants to answer me I'd ask u whats your opinion on the 6 rotor ppre makes is it crazy stupid too much what
That was more of a showcase of what they can do just from an engineering point of view at car shows. They build all Mad Mike's rotary engines for his drift cars, they know their shit, real down to earth guys too. Then there are the crazy Australians who have engineered a bastard V12 using 1 1/2 GM LS V8's. So much going on down here by the south pole!
I enjoy some of your videos, but they take too long. You could have made it in less then half the time if talk too much about irrelevant things. Say your premise, present your methodology, record a couple of seconds of it, move along to the results. write a script if you need to, you're just winging it live. At the very least put a link on the video to the conclusion.
honestly though besides the point that ive never had luck with any of this nonsense I think you would have to do the test under normal driving conditions in similar weather and with the radiator fan unplugged then seeing what the max average temp is with each test. in this case every time it gets to 105 the fan kicks on and cools it down. also maybe see how fast it heats up with each test.
@@gingerballz9463 You can beat 50/50 by running more water. Water is better. Run as much anti-freezing/boiling "coolant" as necessary. Also, he's dead wrong on some things. For this, you really shouldn't see a difference either way.
Just a shame about the commentary. Every second word starts with "F" I guess one shouldn't be to hard on him. I suppose to deny him the right to use the "F" word would be to deny him his entire vocabulary.
With the thermostat installed, there shouldn’t be much of a difference. The thermostat and radiator are doing all the work 😂 Test should be done when it’s under load to the point where the cooling system cannot keep up with the heat produced from the load. Only then will there ever be a difference in results. Otherwise the radiator and thermostat work together to keep a certain temp.
I think your taking the heat measurement from the wrong source young Jedi, if the water temp is hotter that means it's made less surface tension and able to pull more heat from the head, thus transferring the heat to the coolant which then has the ability to cool through radiator. all the fancy graphs and lingo is funny cause your testing the wrong thing doooooohhhhhhhh
"if the water temp is hotter that means it's made less surface tension and able to pull more heat from the head" - What? This does make sense - i.e I don't understand what "it's made less surface tension" - means????
a hotter radiator is good. It means the coolant now has a greater capacity to transfer heat into the radiator and away from the engine. This could be of great benefit on a racetrack on a hot day.
This is first proper scientific analysis I have seen !
Redline water wetter was marketed in the 1980s as a surfacant additive for straight water "glycol based coolant prohibited by track" applications.
What you could be experiencing is an increase in heat convection, which would mean the water wetter is increasing the cooling system’s efficiency.
The increased temperature is actually a good indicator that water wetter is doing what it’s supposed to
The coolant is picking up more heat from the engine and thus the sensor is displaying the increased coolant temperature.
Ex: If you put a kettle on a stove grab a pair of mitts and touch the kettle it’s not very hot.
But if you wet the mitts and then touch the hot kettle it’s going to feel considerably hotter
Your coolant sensor is effectively experiencing wet mitts and so it’s displaying a higher temperature
No. If the coolant is showing a higher indicated temperature then the rate of thermal conductivity drops. Look up 'specific heat capacity'
@@dirtygarageguy The temperature with water wetter is higher. So ww is doing "something". It's not inert. That heat is coming from somewhere...more calories are being transferred from the metal to the liquid. Presumably, since the cooling fins on the radiator are metal, then the reverse must also be true, and the fins will be hotter.
I always thought the water wetter was just for corrosion inhibition when using water (never used it). Its better to be used on track if you got leak for some reason then there wont be any glycol on the track. Additives on it may lower its surface tension and help it to cool better but that might be a minor effect.
Stripper music for a video about making things wetter. I see what you did there. 😁
do 70/30 mix also in your next test.
from what i read in the automotive forum, water wetter not reduce your engine/radiator temperature but make engine cool down faster.
i used 70/30 mix ratio with 4 caps water wetter for my 185cc small bike (my bike use 1L coolant). i live in Southeast Asia, the weather always hot and humid. i can feel my bike cool down faster than before i used water wetter because i can hear my radiator fan turn off quickly.
Overall pretty thorough testing with great data. To me I feel it's snake oil. It's like adding coolant to coolant 😂. Modern day coolant already has detergents, anticorrosion inhibitors and distilled/deionized water.
On the other hand using this with just pure water may yield more interesting results. The thing to consider is your cooling system operating and control. The fan and thermostat control heat, while "coolant" is pressurized to resist boiling. The same principle works for water as well. It may be easier to clean up for track related applications using water wetter.
Shake bottle if it forms bubbles and take forever for bubbles to go away its not a good cooling additive the good ones are when u shake the bottle the bubbles go away right away
shook redline bottle with about 3 ounces Water Wetter. Created about 3 inches of bubbles that took about 1 minute to completely disappear
If you’re not interested in the lower part of the graph as you state why are you waiting until the engine is at ambient temp before retesting? If you when it was at for instance 60deg you could get more tests done in one day.
fair test - and incase something weird happens. After looking at the graph then I decided I wasn't bothered. You have to be open to the possibility that something may happen that you didn't plan for.
Showing the entire graph also shows you're not hiding anything. Companies are always plotting data to give the best outcome.
Awesome. Thank you. Another man doing it right.
The only way I can see it make a difference is in higher ambient temperatures like Arizona, when you use the 100% water, and only then if your cooling system is struggling to lose enough heat. The chemical engineer in me says the only way you’ll improve the cooling is to either pass more air through the radiator or have a bigger radiator. In the UK the only way to change the temperature is to put a different thermostat in!
Yes! I use WW in Memphis/TN and it makes a marginal difference. (That I can definitely feel as I don't get my manhood cooked in the summertime waiting a light to turn green)
I like your effort but personally I feel your test if flawed. I'm def. no expert but I'm just adding common reasoning to what I expected to happen with that wetter stuff. The whole idea of adding it is to reduce or remove the surface tension of the water so it can remove heat better. By magic or what ever who cares.
So it seemed to do by those charts you showed. It may also improve a radiator by the same logic. It will not make a car or bike cooler while sitting still though. You should have ran a constant air speed though the radiator and ran the motor to see if it's in use temp cooled faster. That graph showed it was actually working as intended.
"That graph showed it was actually working as intended"
- but can these graphs be trusted? We'll find out - there's some testing coming soon
Oh and I'm yet to see any data on why surface tension is a block volume of coolant changes anything in regards to the specific heat capacity of water with or without WW added......
@@dirtygarageguy good to hear. it's all if fun right... LOL.. have a good one..
@@dirtygarageguy I wonder about heat capacity or just absorbing heat faster and a big if to if it makes the radiator work better giving better contact to the water/alum. to remove heat faster??
Heat capacity is as it sounds - per mass/volume. Water is also a better heat conductor than most liquids at normal temperatures
Hotter temp means its extracting more heat from the engine, no? Oil temp may show something different.
The coolant is there to cool down the head. If the head is hotter then the coolant isn't doing a great job.
The Workshop ....yes exactly
@@dirtygarageguynope. More heat is in liquid without boiling, less on metal. You want liquid to transfer more heat being cooler? Hmmmm.... :D I would calculate time of open thermostat cycles, and degrees delta, dropping down coolant temp. Would convert that to energy ammount system gave away.. And in garage, in same ambient temperature. Not this playground test.
@@LightBeyondOfSpeed less on metal... His temp probe was ON THE METAL of the cylinder head. The metal temp was higher with the water wetter. That's a fail no matter how you try to slice it. If the coolant temp was higher but the cylinder head temp was lower, you'd have a point, but that wasn't the case.
The bike definitely sounded like nice music after listening to that tune lol
I would suspect the cooling system thermostat is responsible for the maximum recorded temperature regardless of what the coolant fluid is or fluid composition is or where the temperature is sensed.
The range of disparity between the HOBO and the on-board temp indication would greatly depend on the location of the coolant temperature sensor and the placement of the thermocouple and the thermal conduction of the thermocouple at the substrate junction.
The oscillation of the recorded temp is indicative of the coolant thermal currents, coolant thermostat opening and closing and or the cooling fan cycling.
For what it is worth, WaterWetter does have its place with certain applications.
We have used it in automotive applications where the track facility and or the sanctioning body prohibited the use of any Glycol based coolant fluid and mandated water only.
Water only cools OK, but promotes corrosion and an additive such as WaterWetter helps with mitigating corrosion.
"I would suspect the cooling system thermostat is responsible for the maximum recorded temperature regardless of what the coolant fluid is or fluid composition is or where the temperature is sensed."
The coolant temperature as you can see from the video hovers around 100DegC this is way above the thermostat temp of 84 ~ 89DegC - the up and down is the fan coming on and off.
You obviously don't understand how a thermostat works - so I'll be doing a video.
"The range of disparity between the HOBO and the on-board temp indication would greatly depend on the location of the coolant temperature sensor and the placement of the thermocouple and the thermal conduction of the thermocouple at the substrate junction. "
- And this is what I did say. The 2 temperatures are different. I also said that this is not an absolute temperature. But this does matter, as long as the recorded temperature methods are the same in locations and testing equiptment - which they are.
"where the track facility and or the sanctioning body prohibited the use of any Glycol based coolant fluid and mandated water only."
- who in racing is bothered about corrosion? Cna you actually name any?
+The Workshop
"The coolant temperature as you can see from the video hovers around 100DegC this is way above the thermostat temp of 84 ~ 89DegC - the up and down is the fan coming on and off."
After quickly studying this specific Suzuki configuration, set points and operation I now get it and you are correct.
This is how cooling system thermostats work... begin opening when the temp of the thermostat wax reaches the rated temp (~88 C in this case), open fully when the wax temp is consistently held above the rated temperature and begin closing when the wax temp falls bellow the rated temp, cycle as coolant temp dictates.
The fluid temperature surrounding the thermostat wax reservoir determines the state of the thermostat.
In this case, sitting stationary without sufficient forced airflow through the radiator, yes the fan dictates the maximum cooling system temperature which is dictated by the thermo-switch in the radiator inlet tank that is fixed to close (fan on) at ~105C and open (fan off) at ~100C.
While in motion (cruising above ~30 km/h) with most production cooling systems the radiator heat transfer/dissipation is great enough to lower the circulating engine coolant temperature sufficiently for the thermostat to cycle.
--
"You obviously don't understand how a thermostat works - so I'll be doing a video."
While I understand how a thermostat works, I was not previously aware of the configuration, set points and operation of this specific Suzuki.
Please do make a video, maybe I and other viewers will learn something.
"- And this is what I did say. The 2 temperatures are different. I also said that this is not an absolute temperature. But this does matter, as long as the recorded temperature methods are the same in locations and testing equiptment - which they are."
I was agreeing with you...
--
"- who in racing is bothered about corrosion? Cna you actually name any?"
Yes, me and most of my clients.
--
Was the HOBO thermocouple attachment/sense point on the front cylinder bank cam drive idler shaft cap?
Thank you for your time and effort.
Cheers.
The video I watched they added distilled water, Couldn't understand how it would work with such a little amount added, just shows if manufacturers aren't using it there really isn't a need for it. Cheers Mat we ask you deliver.
Another great vid Matt, looking forward to seeing the sv run with Evans in it, but wtf you gonna do if it works ;-)
Depends what you mean by work?
"What's my take on this? It's that it's SHIT" 😂👍No further questions...
Do a test with Evans as well, just for the sake of complete data.
EDIT: would be cool to log oil temps as well.
as well
your screwed now that bit of rain water dickered the entire process. lol :D
I would put a dab of heat transfer compound between the engine and the thermocouple, I do temperature data logging in work too . I would be suspicious of the baseline test result but a good vid matt
"I would be suspicious of the baseline test result but a good vid matt"
- why?
Only the difference in temp, i would have guessed they would all be close together
Like I said, what I'm mainly concerned about is two things. The difference when the engine reaches over 100DegC and is water wetter cooler than normal 50/50.
The conclusion I have at present is no, water wetter isn't cooler. Due to the variables I can't say it runs hotter, but if it were cooler then it should be at least the same, if not cooler. The fact that it was raining when I did the test means that it should have performed better.
More on this in the next test which I believe is better.
Keep up the good work ☺
Purple ice next.. seeing all the rant over you tube purple ice is what you should use over water wetter that will fail
I'm certainly not claiming to be the great and powerful OZ here, but maybe consider the analysis of your results in the following way: The coolant temperature became hotter faster. The capacity of the coolant system to give up heat to the ambient did not increase(no increase in fan cfm or radiator size) The engine was idling and making waste heat at the same rate in both instances. The conclusion should be that the heat transfer of the coolant was increased because it is taking more heat from the engine and becoming hotter. The consideration not being appreciated here is that if the coolant is hotter(and nothing else is changing), the actual metal of the engine has to be cooler because the coolant is able to "steal" more heat at an increased rate. The temp sensors measure the coolant jacket and not the actual cylinder head temperature. The coolant is only hotter because the fan/radiator can't shed the additional BTU's put into the coolant any faster. The only thing that can drive increased heat transfer to the ambient air is a greater temperature difference between the coolant and the ambient air, that's how/why the coolant temp is increasing. Additionally, the dead zone in initial change is due to the thermal mass of the engine absorbing the heat being generated, the temperature difference between the engine metal and coolant has to occur before heat transfer to the coolant begins.
Do you happen to have a comparison of Various Coolants or
Water Plain
Cheap Coolant
HOATS Coolant
Wetter + Coolant?
Wetter Alone?
Dude. Everything I've read says it works better when glycol is not present. I used it and it dropped my hard running temperature by 12 degrees fahrenheit. The reason I used it , is because in my area (Florida, United States ) the racetracks require you not to run antifreeze because crashes can result in spills on the track, which it's very slippery, causing a dangerous situation for everyone behind you.
I believe your test is not valid because you didn't use clean distilled water and water wetter. I've only ever bought one bottle of the stuff and I haven't ridden in about 10 years. My point in saying this, is just to point out that I'm not a fanboy or am I in anyway connected to the company that makes it. But I do know for a fact that on my almost brand new Honda, that the product worked as stated on the bottle.
Also idling and free revving a motorcycle is not even close to what temperatures it will reach under full throttle loads, with very minimal off throttle time.
Im a fan of yours and enjoy your videos, but I gotta disagree with this test.
Under full load the bike is moving. And 12deg F is 7 deg C (ish) that's nothing either way. 7deg could be the difference between days )(temp humidity etc)
Water wetter is an additive package, that's all. It's the water that does the cooling and is better than 50/50 at doing so.
Also read what they actually say - which is what this experiment was about.
"compatible with new or used antifreeze (including DEX-COOL® and long-life versions) to improve the heat transfer of ethylene and propylene glycol systems"
www.redlineoil.com/waterwetter
He replied, I feel special. Thank you. I agree it does say that, but i do feel that without coolant you may have different results.
I also feel like 12 degrees is pretty significant when your at the higher end of the operating temp range. My butt dyno can feel the different between acceptable and on the edge of overheating and I know yours can too.
I had a digital gauge in my truck. Noticed a 6°F drop using water wetter. If i remember right without antifreeze gives you better results according to the label but thats for race purposes only i guess.
Yes and it should - water is the best coolant there is - the water wetter did nothing - however the corrosion experiment I'm doing at the moment is promising in regards to water wetter
Career pilot here... 20 bucks says pure distilled water provides the best cooling, but shortens service life of cooling system components. (that's why the P-51D Flight Manual specifies 50/50 mix of water/glycol, aka Prestone).
MachOverspeed
Obviously. "Coolants" are just to prevent freezing or boiling.
love the intro song!!!
I think the product claims are only valid for the conditions of mixed with 100% de-ionized water, for use on surfaces that prohibit use of coolants, like certain racetracks or concurs venues.
Of course water temp stay like that. You want go 70 c
At 10:30, I thought my phone shit out a pixel... Lol
My SV no longer does high idle when cold. You said you were going to address that. Did I miss it?
No not yet
Ended up watching this after viewing the Evans videos. I like the videos and appreciate your thought process, but take issue with the assessment of the water wetter product.
Your video only proved that the bike's cooling system stayed within its operating range during an extended idle period. To test the product claims one would need to apply a significant load to the engine, time how long it took the cooling system to reach an upper operating temperature and then repeat the test with the water wetter added along with identical climate and load. I suspect you would have a positive outcome.
Water wetter is a surfactant and corrosion inhibitor for water. Science has repeatedly shown that surfactants / wetting agents can improve heat transfer between fluids and solids. In this case the water surfactant acts as a flux agent, reducing the vapor barrier that can exist between water and high temperature surfaces. This vapor barrier and its impact on heat transfer are known as the Leidenfrost effect. Research continues, but many advances were tied to steam engine technology.
My personal experience with the product was on an antique car with a flathead engine. The cooling system had been marginal for years and after completely flushing the block and restoring the system to near original, it cooled adequately with plain water. After a short while I added the water wetter, primarily for anti-corrosion and water pump lubrication benefits since freezing temperatures were rare in Florida. Afterwards, the cooling system was rock steady whether idling, in traffic, or on the highway and it ran 10 degrees (F) cooler than with water alone.
"To test the product claims one would need to apply a significant load to the engine, time how long it took the cooling system to reach an upper operating temperature and then repeat the test with the water wetter added along with identical climate and load. I suspect you would have a positive outcome."
- I was about to reply to this, then read the next bit...
"Water wetter is a surfactant and corrosion inhibitor for water."
- Exactly correct.
"This vapor barrier and its impact on heat transfer are known as the Leidenfrost effect."
- Nucleate boiling and the leidenfrost effect as not the same thing, and whilst I agree surface tension plays it's part what you have to consider here is coolant volume, thermal load, flow rates and the sensitivity of the system. All these experiments on nucleate boiling and Leidenfrost effect have been in stantic systems.
"and water pump lubrication"
- Lubrication against what?
" Afterwards, the cooling system was rock steady whether idling, in traffic, or on the highway and it ran 10 degrees (F) cooler than with water alone."
- This IO don't believe, and I'll be testing it on the road soon, but with actual data, not just heresay.
@@dirtygarageguy
I mentioned the Leidenfrost effect as well as steam engine technology to highlight the fact that this is treading old ground. There is no need to debate the nuances of heat capacity, thermal flux, film or nucleate boiling, vapor barrier and surface tension. Neither of us is wearing a white coat in a clean room or working on earth-shattering energy theories.
Water wetter will have no appreciable impact on cooling systems that maintain normal operating temperature regardless of load. Surfactants do not alter the temperature a thermostat opens or change the laws of thermodynamics, but they can and do improve water's ability to transfer heat. To witness any benefit, a threshold temperature above the normal range would need to be measured against time while identically testing both a water control and water with additive. An interesting experiment - pull the thermostat from an engine, put it under load and time how long it takes to reach an given temperature with each scenario run several times and averaged.
In the case of my 1950's car, the thermostat and temperature probe were on distant ends of the engine. Despite cleaning, after decades of corrosion, erosion, contamination and scale buildup, the cooling system read higher than the thermostat setting. The water and additive mix lowered the sensor temperature reading. If the thermostat was 175F and the gauge read 195F with water, yet consistently read 185F with the additive, it's hard to chalk that up to placebo effect.
Is it something of a crutch? Yes. But if it helps a vehicle with marginal cooling capacity run within the normal range, or improves cooling when towing or running an engine hard for an extended period, is that really a bad thing?
Seems like a good test, I just have one concern. I may be wrong but the purpose of water weter is to raise the specific heat of water so it can absorb more heat and then get rid of it faster. If this is the case wouldn't the biggest change be after the water has went threw the radiator and gave off all it's heat? And at an idle shouldn't the engine temp be the same regardless of the coolant due to the thermostat regulating engine temp? Idk that's just kinda how I thought it worked but I could be wrong, man keep em coming. Really enjoy the vids
" I may be wrong but the purpose of water weter is to raise the specific heat of water so it can absorb more heat and then get rid of it faster."
- this is what they say;
"Superior heat transfer properties compared to glycol-based antifreeze"
- which could be interpreted that way and i think this is shite, but there is an experiment on the way that will lest this.
But to re-cap. In the experiment we are measuring the temperature of the head. If the coolant is better at 'cooling' then the head temperature should be lower. We didn't see this.
Do you have an explanation about why the cooling fan is kicking in at a higher temperature in the additive graphs please? Why is it not kicking in and out at the same temperature? The fan sensor has a fixed temperature when it kicks in, regardless of what type of coolant is in use. Thanks
when does the fan kick in?
Your upper radiator hose looks pretty swollen on the sv650. Looks about ready to give you a bad day.
Now I can call it Evans...
Water wetter should be tested with track conditions, there may a difference. It may be the way it transfers heat to the radiator material.
LOL what? Why would that make a difference?
I have been to a few track days where guys have used the product and most of them reported a slightly lower temp. I have not tested it myself yet. Maybe I should in the summer with the track car. 328 E36. And it gets hot in CPT in summer. 36 C ambient is not unusual.
Just a thought, I am not an engineer. Are there reasons for better thermal transfer in the mediums used?
Engines run cooler because they are running water not 50/50. Water is the best (apart from ammonia) fluid to use. They use WW because it is not a glycol based anti-freeze
Second, first thumbs up though!
05' WR450 here, I know pure distilled water is best for cooling but no protection, can I just run pure water and watter wetter for protection??. I do hear that 50/50 antifreeze lubricates water pump and other parts that water wetter may lack though..
That's nonsense. Water pumps don't need lubricating on the water side of the system. Use anti freeze if you wanna protect from freezing.
@@dirtygarageguy I was told Antifreeze is also a lubricant for your engine that ensures various parts, like the water pump seals, and other parts to move smoothly. In doing so, it reduces friction, which can cause damage to your engine... Not sure if I'll just keep the 50/50 glycol mix or just water and water wetter, I'll think about it..
Intro song name ?
ruclips.net/video/tgIqecROs5M/видео.html
Darude - Sandstorm
JUST A quick one, if i rev my bikes a few times with on exhaust on it can it damage my bike?
What? I don't understand the question unless you mean 'with the exhaust off'?
yes, so i bought a full sc project exhaust so i was thinking while the whole exhaust is of can i start the bike up and give it a few revs with no exhaust. is it safe?
Yeah, just loud. And make sure you have nothing flammable near the exhaust ports - seriously, nothing flammable!
ok will do thank you :)
4 hours later a man was found dead at his house, experts belive that he was suicidal and burned his whole house down
I just tried water wetter in my car it worked good. My gauge is usually between 90-95° cel mark I drive around after pouring a third of the bottle in my coolant resivoir my car cools periodically it cycles and goes down to the 80degree mark. It will stay a little then go back and you prob added a teaspoon you just idled it in ur garage and sucked up petrol fumes and said "hey guys it don't fooken work mate
I miss my SV1000!
I like memes
Magic does not exist in this world :(
didnt realize there were shirts and shit! i feel like i need the "2 Strokes are shite!" t-shirt now, seeing as i drive a 50cc 2T pice of shit lol
He had the high idle (more circulation) in part 1
Water Wetter is MOSTLY for corrosion preventing purposes in a racecar.
Antifreeze is as slick, and banned from some racing.
Thus. Water wetter (not slick, very basic chemical make up)
And yes. In a non thermostatically controlled system. It does work.
show me the evidence? Until them, we'll have to keep testing. One quick point though. Who needs corrosion protection in racing?
Well you don't drain the system and refill with antifreeze between every single race meeting/track day, do you?
fuck this fuck that, proper technical.
Are you saying the word fuck isn't technical?
What song is that on the time lapse? I keep hearing you use it and I want more lol.
faded by alan walker mate
I know this has nothing to do with your video but I thought since nobody else wants to answer me I'd ask u whats your opinion on the 6 rotor ppre makes is it crazy stupid too much what
That was more of a showcase of what they can do just from an engineering point of view at car shows. They build all Mad Mike's rotary engines for his drift cars, they know their shit, real down to earth guys too. Then there are the crazy Australians who have engineered a bastard V12 using 1 1/2 GM LS V8's. So much going on down here by the south pole!
Skip to 13:08 for the conclusion. Thank me later.
It’s shit. Water wetter Lol.
I enjoy some of your videos, but they take too long. You could have made it in less then half the time if talk too much about irrelevant things. Say your premise, present your methodology, record a couple of seconds of it, move along to the results. write a script if you need to, you're just winging it live. At the very least put a link on the video to the conclusion.
And most people disagree with you. My channel my videos - don't like it - fuck off.
@@dirtygarageguy I love a salty mechanic.😂
honestly though besides the point that ive never had luck with any of this nonsense I think you would have to do the test under normal driving conditions in similar weather and with the radiator fan unplugged then seeing what the max average temp is with each test. in this case every time it gets to 105 the fan kicks on and cools it down. also maybe see how fast it heats up with each test.
Vp and hyper cool are good i use the hyper cool
Your Sunday test you have fairings on witch hold heat more
right..............
The Workshop fan of your work and totally agree on what you mean can't beat a 50/50 mix.
@@gingerballz9463 You can beat 50/50 by running more water. Water is better. Run as much anti-freezing/boiling "coolant" as necessary. Also, he's dead wrong on some things. For this, you really shouldn't see a difference either way.
What’s the song at 2:50?
@Spongebob Schwanzkopf just came here to make sure someone said sandstorm
What is the music at 2:50-4:05?
Alan Walker - Fade [NCS Release]
Many thanks.
Very scientific...
Just a shame about the commentary. Every second word starts with "F" I guess one shouldn't be to hard on him. I suppose to deny him the right to use the "F" word would be to deny him his entire vocabulary.
If your water is not wet, then I suggest you buy some Industrial Strength H2O... I can guarantee that it's VERY WET!
I love nursing
With the thermostat installed, there shouldn’t be much of a difference. The thermostat and radiator are doing all the work 😂
Test should be done when it’s under load to the point where the cooling system cannot keep up with the heat produced from the load.
Only then will there ever be a difference in results. Otherwise the radiator and thermostat work together to keep a certain temp.
Water wetter is shit 😁 Evans is still shit 50/ 50 mix is sweet.
Basically it does not work but makes it worser saves you 16 min of watching
What?
Worser
I think your taking the heat measurement from the wrong source young Jedi, if the water temp is hotter that means it's made less surface tension and able to pull more heat from the head, thus transferring the heat to the coolant which then has the ability to cool through radiator. all the fancy graphs and lingo is funny cause your testing the wrong thing doooooohhhhhhhh
"if the water temp is hotter that means it's made less surface tension and able to pull more heat from the head"
- What? This does make sense - i.e I don't understand what "it's made less surface tension" - means????
a hotter radiator is good. It means the coolant now has a greater capacity to transfer heat into the radiator and away from the engine. This could be of great benefit on a racetrack on a hot day.
Your exactly correct, the coolant temperature will be hotter because its pulling more heat from the cylinder
Snake oil . who paid money for this crap...?
Well I did LOL
The Workshop Matt....! You are an idiot ,
Well they wouldn't give me it for free - I asked LOL
The Workshop well it must of bin worth it then lol
The Workshop same as Evans coolant , its special stuff.