Thanks, I ended up dumping it in my neighbors yard.


Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org


"David L. Martel" wrote in message
...
Stormin,

How dispose of old antifreeze?

Your County or City probably has rules and collection sites for
residents. Here, it's just like oil. Drive to the drop-off site, and pour
it in the barrel. There are businesses that handle commercial accounts.

Dave M.

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:29:59 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

wrote in news:vlnq19tnih51puv9634hcn48ht6k4qs5kh@
4ax.com:

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 00:38:40 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Nate Nagel wrote in
:

nobody ever removes the block drains,


Only knuckle-dragging hacks and driveway grease-monkeys fail to remove
block drains.
Except some cars no longer HAVE block drains. Just like some
automatic transmissions no longer have dipsticks and fill tubes.



An engine without a block drain does not need one: the engineers will have
designed the block to drain through the radiator. This is why I said "if
applicable" in my original reply. But the fact that the OP was only able to
re-install about half the reported capacity /strongly/ suggests that he has
left a lot of old coolant in the block.

If the OP's engine has a block drain (or two), then it is NOT sufficient to
simply "flush" the block by attempting to run the engine with plain water
through it, and it is an extremely BAD idea to run the engine with plain
water as the coolant. Running an engine with plain water can damage the
head gasket(s).


I call BS Tegger. Running an engine with plain water for a short time
will not hurt ANYTHING. Long term you could get corrosion, or water
pump seal failure - and without antifreeze you have little or no
overheat protection because pure water in a on-pressurized system
boils at 212F, The boiling point goes up about 3.25 degrees F per lb
of pressure over atmospheric. (so plain water at 14 psi pressure over
atmospheric boils at about 255F). Antifreeze increases the boiling
point beyond that significantly.
The correct approach is, with the engine *COLD* and *NOT RUNNING*, to drain
the rad AND block. With the drains open, run plain water through the block
and rad until the water runs clear, let it drain again, close the drains,
then re-fill using the correct procedure as per the factory instructions.
Many engines today will not totally drain, and do not have drain
cocks. Some don't even have removeable threaded drain plugs. It is not
an issue because all engines run antifreeze. "in the old days" cars
(and other engines) ran with plain water much of the time, and it was
important to be able to drain them to prevent freeze damage.

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:33:24 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

micky wrote in
:



It's bad when the rain makes it run off into streams.



Modern coolant breaks down quickly in the environment. It's only dangerous
when consumed by animals before it has a chance to break down.

Coolant tastes sweet, which is why it's attractive to animals.
Ethelene glycol breaks down into CO and water. It's half life in
both air and soil is about 1 day. However, engine coolant
(particularly old, used coolant) is more than just ethylene glycol and
water. It contains additives (many of which, today, are organic acids)
as well as heavy metals as the product of corrosion. The heavy metals
don't break down - so it is a good idea to dispose of the stuff in a
"responsible manner".

wrote in
:

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:29:59 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:



If the OP's engine has a block drain (or two), then it is NOT
sufficient to simply "flush" the block by attempting to run the engine
with plain water through it, and it is an extremely BAD idea to run
the engine with plain water as the coolant. Running an engine with
plain water can damage the head gasket(s).


I call BS Tegger. Running an engine with plain water for a short time
will not hurt ANYTHING.



It damages the fire rings. Boiling around the fire rings will occur very
quickly after startup with plain water. Corrosion will begin just about as
quickly.



Many engines today will not totally drain, and do not have drain
cocks. Some don't even have removeable threaded drain plugs.



I have yet to encounter a single instance of an automotive engine block
that could not be drained of coolant. Yes, a small amount is always left
behind, but that amount is on the order of a pint or less, not a few
quarts.


It is not an issue because all engines run antifreeze.



That antifreeze gets old. The surface-tension-reducers, anti-corrosion
additives, and other critical chemicals get used up or degrade. ALL
reasonably-modern automotive engines have coolant-change intervals for this
reason. ALL of them.




--
Tegger

On 8/28/2013 6:07 PM, Tegger wrote:
wrote in
:

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:29:59 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:



If the OP's engine has a block drain (or two), then it is NOT
sufficient to simply "flush" the block by attempting to run the engine
with plain water through it, and it is an extremely BAD idea to run
the engine with plain water as the coolant. Running an engine with
plain water can damage the head gasket(s).


I call BS Tegger. Running an engine with plain water for a short time
will not hurt ANYTHING.



It damages the fire rings. Boiling around the fire rings will occur very
quickly after startup with plain water. Corrosion will begin just about as
quickly.



Many engines today will not totally drain, and do not have drain
cocks. Some don't even have removeable threaded drain plugs.



I have yet to encounter a single instance of an automotive engine block
that could not be drained of coolant. Yes, a small amount is always left
behind, but that amount is on the order of a pint or less, not a few
quarts.


It is not an issue because all engines run antifreeze.



That antifreeze gets old. The surface-tension-reducers, anti-corrosion
additives, and other critical chemicals get used up or degrade. ALL
reasonably-modern automotive engines have coolant-change intervals for this
reason. ALL of them.

It's actually more important on older engines where there is no coolant
recovery bottle. The oxygen in the air in the top tank of the radiator
tends to degrade the coolant faster than the coolant will naturally
degrade with no oxygen. That same effect can happen somewhat in the
recovery bottle, but that coolant is not nearly as hot as the coolant in
the top tank of the radiator (or side tank, same difference.) Back in
the day it was recommended to flush and refill every fall, now typical
service interval is 4-5 years.

nate

Nate Nagel wrote in
:

On 8/28/2013 6:07 PM, Tegger wrote:


That antifreeze gets old. The surface-tension-reducers,
anti-corrosion additives, and other critical chemicals get used up or
degrade. ALL reasonably-modern automotive engines have coolant-change
intervals for this reason. ALL of them.

It's actually more important on older engines where there is no
coolant recovery bottle.



ALL modern engines have coolant-replacement intervals. ALL of them.

I am unaware of ANY automotive engine sold into the North American market
without a recovery bottle since about the late '70s. Maybe even before then



The oxygen in the air in the top tank of the
radiator tends to degrade the coolant faster



The coolant degradation I'm talking about has nothing to do with oxygen
(although oxidation can be an issue), but instead has to do with preventing
boiling at the fire rings. Each time the coolant is brought to "nucleate
boiling" (DAGS), a little of the additives are consumed. Eventually
consumption reaches the point where replacement of the coolant is necessary
or additives must be replenished.

Ray Bohacz covered this very issue in a recent issue of Hemmings Classic
Car. Last couple of months. You could look it up.



--
Tegger

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Thanks, I ended up dumping it in my neighbors yard.



I put some in a dish and slid it uder the neighbor's fence. Their dog is
just too damed yappy, but that shouldn't be the case too much longer.


--
Tegger

On 8/28/2013 6:37 PM, Tegger wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Thanks, I ended up dumping it in my neighbors yard.



I put some in a dish and slid it uder the neighbor's fence. Their dog is
just too damed yappy, but that shouldn't be the case too much longer.


Put in some meat flavor, and the little turd will suck it down faster.
Soak some lollipops for their fat and ugly turd kids too.

Stormin Mormon wrote in news:r3vTt.194002
:

On 8/28/2013 6:37 PM, Tegger wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Thanks, I ended up dumping it in my neighbors yard.



I put some in a dish and slid it uder the neighbor's fence. Their dog is
just too damed yappy, but that shouldn't be the case too much longer.


Put in some meat flavor, and the little turd will suck it down faster.
Soak some lollipops for their fat and ugly turd kids too.




Hey, the yapping has stopped! And the kids aren't screaming anymore!

Uh oh, the doorbell is ringing. I may need to make haste for the next
county...


--
Tegger

Oh, man. My spoof is active again. He's funnier
than I. I hope no one takes him seriously.

For the next several weeks, every time I see a
cop car, it's coming to take me for the death of
a couple kids died of antifreeze.

..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 8/28/2013 7:02 PM, Tegger wrote:

Thanks, I ended up dumping it in my neighbors yard.



I put some in a dish and slid it uder the neighbor's fence. Their dog is
just too damed yappy, but that shouldn't be the case too much longer.


Put in some meat flavor, and the little turd will suck it down faster.
Soak some lollipops for their fat and ugly turd kids too.




Hey, the yapping has stopped! And the kids aren't screaming anymore!

Uh oh, the doorbell is ringing. I may need to make haste for the next
county...

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 00:14:52 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote in news:AcbTt.206277$Dy1.79803
:

So the total system is 14 quarts. He adds 7 quarts of pure, and that
some how makes it way off?



It does if he's failed to pull the block drain (if applicable) and/or
opened the heater-control valve (if applicable).



Around here (NY State, USA), we run 50/50
glycol to water.



I'm two states north of you, and we use the same proportions. But those
proportions start with *known quantities and fresh fluids*. Failure to do a
full drain introduces variables, and not good ones.

Antifreeze should always be mixed 50-50. You really should flush out
all the old stuff anyway. Flush to 100% water and then add 50%
antifreeze. Done.

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 00:38:40 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Nate Nagel wrote in
:

nobody ever removes the block drains,


Only knuckle-dragging hacks and driveway grease-monkeys fail to remove
block drains.

Wrong. There is no reason to remove them. Bad idea!

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:10:35 -0400, Nate Nagel
wrote:

On 8/27/2013 8:55 PM, Tegger wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote in
:

On 8/27/2013 8:38 PM, Tegger wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote in
:

nobody ever removes the block drains,


Only knuckle-dragging hacks and driveway grease-monkeys fail to
remove block drains.


'splain to me why then I am apparently the first person to touch them
on pretty much any car I get...



'Cause all your cars were worked on by the above-mentioned persons.

Or *not* worked on, as the case may be... seems that a "coolant flush"
anymore consists of a simple drain and refill; if you're lucky you might
get the lower hose pulled and rad backflushed.

Nonsense. Try reading if you can't think. There is no reason to even
pull the lower hose. If you do, you'd better replace it.

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 20:51:54 -0500, Gordon Shumway
wrote:

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 20:30:54 -0400, Nate Nagel
wrote:

On 8/27/2013 8:09 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
So the total system is 14 quarts. He adds 7 quarts of pure, and that
some how makes it way off? Around here (NY State, USA), we run 50/50
glycol to water. Where are you, and what proportion do you use?

.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

On 8/27/2013 7:58 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:
Adding pure antifreeze would have been just about the right amount
actually. Half of the system should have been 7 quarts of pure
antifreeze.


Actually 7 quarts would have been way off.

Only after knowing how much coolant drained out would you be able to
calculate the correct amount of water and antifreeze... that is
assuming the coolant was at the correct level AND the correct ratio to
begin with.

In your case after you drained out half of the total volume of the
system, with the above assumption, you knew you had 3-1/2 quarts
remaining of water and 3-1/2 quarts of antifreeze. Because that is
precisely half of the system volume that is precisely what needed to
be replaced... 3-1/2 half quarts of water and 3-1/2 quarts of
antifreeze.


He's never going to completely drain it, unless he removed block drain
plugs *and* opened petcock at radiator (assuming there is one) nobody
ever removes the block drains, so it's a fair bet that there's still
some old coolant mix in, really the only way to know for sure is to
check it with one of those floating ball things.

nate

Right. You need a base line to begin with otherwise you're just
guessing.

If you don't *measure* the specific gravity, you're just guessing.
It's not like it difficult. There is no need to drain the system, at
all. Sheesh!

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 22:21:41 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 20:30:54 -0400, Nate Nagel
wrote:

On 8/27/2013 8:09 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
So the total system is 14 quarts. He adds 7 quarts of pure, and that
some how makes it way off? Around here (NY State, USA), we run 50/50
glycol to water. Where are you, and what proportion do you use?

.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

On 8/27/2013 7:58 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:
Adding pure antifreeze would have been just about the right amount
actually. Half of the system should have been 7 quarts of pure
antifreeze.


Actually 7 quarts would have been way off.

Only after knowing how much coolant drained out would you be able to
calculate the correct amount of water and antifreeze... that is
assuming the coolant was at the correct level AND the correct ratio to
begin with.

In your case after you drained out half of the total volume of the
system, with the above assumption, you knew you had 3-1/2 quarts
remaining of water and 3-1/2 quarts of antifreeze. Because that is
precisely half of the system volume that is precisely what needed to
be replaced... 3-1/2 half quarts of water and 3-1/2 quarts of
antifreeze.


He's never going to completely drain it, unless he removed block drain
plugs *and* opened petcock at radiator (assuming there is one) nobody
ever removes the block drains, so it's a fair bet that there's still
some old coolant mix in, really the only way to know for sure is to
check it with one of those floating ball things.

nate
If you don't FLUSH the system when changing coolant, you are wasting
your time and money. If you do flush the system, you have 7 quarts (in
this case) of clean fresh water already in the system waiting for the
addition of 7 quarts of antifreeze.

Then measure the specific gravity, just as a check.

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 22:07:13 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

wrote in
:

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:29:59 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:



If the OP's engine has a block drain (or two), then it is NOT
sufficient to simply "flush" the block by attempting to run the engine
with plain water through it, and it is an extremely BAD idea to run
the engine with plain water as the coolant. Running an engine with
plain water can damage the head gasket(s).


I call BS Tegger. Running an engine with plain water for a short time
will not hurt ANYTHING.



It damages the fire rings. Boiling around the fire rings will occur very
quickly after startup with plain water. Corrosion will begin just about as
quickly.

That MIGHT happen under heavy load - but certainly NOT running it
with cold water flowing through to flush.
Did you not know that pure water is actually a BETTER coolant than
antifreeze, as far as it's ability to remove heat??? Obviously not,
or you wouldn't believe the "boiling around fire rings" myth.


Many engines today will not totally drain, and do not have drain
cocks. Some don't even have removeable threaded drain plugs.



I have yet to encounter a single instance of an automotive engine block
that could not be drained of coolant. Yes, a small amount is always left
behind, but that amount is on the order of a pint or less, not a few
quarts.


You've never worked on a Geo Metro then.
And on a 3.9 Dakota the "drain plug" is under the left? engine mount.
You are going to remove the engine mount to drain coolant??
No drain plug on Bimmer N52 engine either.
On A C5 Corvette you will not remove them without removing the engine
from the chassis.
On some 4.3 GM engines the knock sensor is the drain plug - figure
THAT one out without a good manual!!!!
ANd on A Mercedes M112/m113 engine the block drains completely from
the lower rad hose without removing the drain plug, which IS
provided, but is not necessary.
There is no block drain on a 2008 Acura RDX.
Most LT1 or L99 Chevies with reverse flow you need to remove the knock
sensor to drain the block - which are easy to break!!!!!
L:ater BMC Minis do not have block drains either (and they don't need
them)
Caddy Northstar engines have no block drains.
No drain plugs on 5 liter Mustang engine either - only casting plugs.

It is not an issue because all engines run antifreeze.



That antifreeze gets old. The surface-tension-reducers, anti-corrosion
additives, and other critical chemicals get used up or degrade. ALL
reasonably-modern automotive engines have coolant-change intervals for this
reason. ALL of them.

You didn't listen. Yes, antifreeze needs to be changed occaisionally.
That is a GIVEN - but you do not need to drain a block to prevent
freezing when you run "permanent" antifreeze. (as compared to alcohol
antifreeze- which boiled away in unsealed, non pressurized cooling
systems)

What many do NOT have is block drains. You are obviously not a
mechanic.

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 18:44:45 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 8/28/2013 6:37 PM, Tegger wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Thanks, I ended up dumping it in my neighbors yard.



I put some in a dish and slid it uder the neighbor's fence. Their dog is
just too damed yappy, but that shouldn't be the case too much longer.


Put in some meat flavor, and the little turd will suck it down faster.
Soak some lollipops for their fat and ugly turd kids too.
It's no joking matter if you have seen an animal suffer from glycol
poisoning. It is not a fast or easy death - and criminal charges are
no joke either if you get caught.

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:37:16 -0400, wrote:


Did you not know that pure water is actually a BETTER coolant than
antifreeze, as far as it's ability to remove heat??? Obviously not,
or you wouldn't believe the "boiling around fire rings" myth.


Here's good info - easy to see.
http://hellafunctional.com/?p=629
Might surprise some the pure anti-freeze freezes at 8F.
50/50 is a good mix up north. -40F protection.
It's a bit overkill for most places, but an easy 1:1 mix to do.
The additives degrade, so a less mix would require changing more
often.
Many people might remember the "old days" when running almost pure
water was common until wintertime
You would lose coolant all summer from the rad cap popping, or maybe a
broken hose.
Just fill it with water until winter approached, then drain the rad
and add a gallon or two of anti-freeze. If you dally and a cold snap
catches you, you could be hurting. Lost a radiator that way.
Also had to pour hot water on a number of other peoples' radiators
that froze up in cold snaps.
Used to be that way with washer fluid too. People would put fluid
without anti-freeze in the tank, and it would still be there when
winter rolled around. No spray,
Best to use washer fluid with anti-freeze and only add 50/50 to the
radiator all year round.


What many do NOT have is block drains. You are obviously not a
mechanic.

Doesn't matter anyway. It's asking for trouble. Leave it sealed up,
and pull the lower rad hose. You should inspect those hoses anyway,
and replace them if there's any doubt about their condition.
Same with a rad petcock. Don't even touch it. Most now are cheap
plastic and it's a good chance you'll need a new one as soon as you
open it. And for what, a tiny dribble of water if you're lucky?
Takes all day.
Always flush with clean water. I don't use hose connectors.
Just drain it by pulling the lower hose, and refill with water.
Run it for a few minutes after the thermostat opens up.
Wait half an hour for cool down, then repeat the process.
After emptying it the second time, you'll see it's clean water coming
out. No worry about even a gallon left in the block.
Close it up and pour in half the system capacity with 100%
anti-freeze. Top off with water. Done.

wrote in
:

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 22:07:13 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:



It damages the fire rings. Boiling around the fire rings will occur
very quickly after startup with plain water. Corrosion will begin just
about as quickly.


That MIGHT happen under heavy load - but certainly NOT running it
with cold water flowing through to flush.



Do not run the engine when flushing. All engines should be flushed when the
block and rad are cool to the touch.



Did you not know that pure water is actually a BETTER coolant than
antifreeze, as far as it's ability to remove heat???



Actually, it's not. Not in the way that automotive engines need it to be.

Go read Ray Bohacz's article. The article is in Hemming's Classic Car from
the last couple of months. You won't do this, of course.



Obviously not,
or you wouldn't believe the "boiling around fire rings" myth.



Go read Ray Bohacz's article before you accuse me of subscribing to a "myth".
The article is in Hemming's Classic Car from the last couple of months. You
won't do this, of course.







I have yet to encounter a single instance of an automotive engine
block that could not be drained of coolant. Yes, a small amount is
always left behind, but that amount is on the order of a pint or less,
not a few quarts.



You've never worked on a... snipped list



You appear to be thinking that I said that all engines have block drains. I
did not.

Read my post above: I said all blocks COULD BE DRAINED. The method of drain
is up to the manufacturer.

EVERY vehicle on your list has a way to drain the block (even if
inconvenient).
EVERY vehicle on your list has a coolant change interval. As I asserted all
along.


--
Tegger

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:15:01 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

wrote in
:

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 22:07:13 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:



It damages the fire rings. Boiling around the fire rings will occur
very quickly after startup with plain water. Corrosion will begin just
about as quickly.


That MIGHT happen under heavy load - but certainly NOT running it
with cold water flowing through to flush.



Do not run the engine when flushing. All engines should be flushed when the
block and rad are cool to the touch.


And if you are flushing the motor and running it at the same time it
will never GET any more than barely warm to the touch.


Did you not know that pure water is actually a BETTER coolant than
antifreeze, as far as it's ability to remove heat???



Actually, it's not. Not in the way that automotive engines need it to be.

Go read Ray Bohacz's article. The article is in Hemming's Classic Car from
the last couple of months. You won't do this, of course.
I didn't say it was a better coolant all-round - just better at
removing heat. Learn to READ. I have been a mechanic since the
sixties, and have taught both high school and trade level auto
mechanics - I DO know what I'm talking about.


Obviously not,
or you wouldn't believe the "boiling around fire rings" myth.



Go read Ray Bohacz's article before you accuse me of subscribing to a "myth".
The article is in Hemming's Classic Car from the last couple of months. You
won't do this, of course.







I have yet to encounter a single instance of an automotive engine
block that could not be drained of coolant. Yes, a small amount is
always left behind, but that amount is on the order of a pint or less,
not a few quarts.



You've never worked on a... snipped list



You appear to be thinking that I said that all engines have block drains. I
did not.

Read my post above: I said all blocks COULD BE DRAINED. The method of drain
is up to the manufacturer.

EVERY vehicle on your list has a way to drain the block (even if
inconvenient).
EVERY vehicle on your list has a coolant change interval. As I asserted all
along.
I didn't say there was not a specified change interval and you DID
say all engines have block drains - and the only way tototally drain
SOME of the engines I listed is to remove the engine os stand the
vehicle on end. - or remove the engine mounts, or other similar very
unlikely methods.

wrote in
:




I didn't say it was a better coolant all-round - just better at
removing heat.



Actually, it's not. Not in the way that automotive engines need it to be.
Go read Ray Bohacz's article.

I'll partially summarize what I remember from Bohacz's article: Plain water
has too much surface tension. High surface tension means that the boundary
layer is too tenacious, and tends to change phase (boil) before it can be
stripped away to be replaced by cooler water. Once the water changes phase,
heat transfer essentially stops, and localized overheating begins.




Learn to READ.
I have been a mechanic since the
sixties, and have taught both high school and trade level auto
mechanics - I DO know what I'm talking about.



Go read Ray Bohacz's article.

If you're truly the teacher that you claim to have been, then you will be
intrigued that there might be information out there that you may not know.




I didn't say there was not a specified change interval and you DID
say all engines have block drains



I did not say that. On Wednesday the 28th I said that if the engine did not
have a block drain that it was meant to drain through the rad. Which was
incorrect, of course: some engines require that you pull the lower rad hose
for a block drain.



- and the only way tototally drain
SOME of the engines I listed is to remove the engine os stand the
vehicle on end. - or remove the engine mounts, or other similar very
unlikely methods.



Or just pull the lower rad hose, which is what I discovered when I looked
up all the engines you mentioned.



--
Tegger

On Thursday, August 29, 2013 12:50:19 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:15:01 +0000 (UTC), Tegger

wrote:



wrote in

:



On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 22:07:13 +0000 (UTC), Tegger

wrote:







It damages the fire rings. Boiling around the fire rings will occur

very quickly after startup with plain water. Corrosion will begin just

about as quickly.





That MIGHT happen under heavy load - but certainly NOT running it

with cold water flowing through to flush.







Do not run the engine when flushing. All engines should be flushed when the

block and rad are cool to the touch.





And if you are flushing the motor and running it at the same time it

will never GET any more than barely warm to the touch.




Tegger should take that up with Prestone. They make
a radiator flushing product, been selling it for decades.
Here are the instructions:

1.With engine off and cool, remove radiator cap.* Drain radiator then close draincock.

2.Pour entire contents of Prestone® Super Radiator Flush into radiator and fill with water. For systems larger that 12 quarts, use two bottles.

3.Run engine with heater on highest temperature setting for 10 minutes after reaching normal operating temperature.

4.With engine off and cool, remove radiator cap, drain radiator, and close draincock. Refill with water and replace radiator cap to fully closed position. Repeat step #3.

5.Stop engine and allow to cool. Remove radiator cap, drain system and close draincock. Add enough recommended coolant to achieve a 50-70% concentration. Top off radiator with water. Replace radiator cap to fully closed position. Run engine for 20 minutes to mix coolant/water.

6.If equipped with a non-pressurized coolant reservoir, rinse, drain, and refill with a 50-70% solution of the coolant and water.


They run the car for 10 mins first with water and the
flushing product, then again in step 4 for 10 mins with
just water.

I agree with you. You don't want to run on pure water
for an extended period of time because antifreeze provides
corrosion inhibitors and lubrication for the water pump.
But running it on water for a few minutes at idle while flushing
it out is done all the time with no ill effects. It it's
good enough for Prestone, it's good enough for me.

Also, I'd rather do a couple of flushs and refills instead
of trying to get all the mixture out by opening block
drains, etc. Who wants to screw around with a block drain,
especially an older one, that could snap off, leak later,
etc? The only downside to the multi flush approach is that
you do wind up with more liquid that has to be properly
disposed of.









Did you not know that pure water is actually a BETTER coolant than

antifreeze, as far as it's ability to remove heat???







Actually, it's not. Not in the way that automotive engines need it to be..



Go read Ray Bohacz's article. The article is in Hemming's Classic Car from

the last couple of months. You won't do this, of course.

I didn't say it was a better coolant all-round - just better at

removing heat.


You are correct there too. It's my understanding that in race
cars for example, they use the min amount of antifreeze for the
application because the more water, the better it is at absorbing heat.


Learn to READ. I have been a mechanic since the

sixties, and have taught both high school and trade level auto

mechanics - I DO know what I'm talking about.





Obviously not,

or you wouldn't believe the "boiling around fire rings" myth.







Go read Ray Bohacz's article before you accuse me of subscribing to a "myth".

The article is in Hemming's Classic Car from the last couple of months. You

won't do this, of course.















I have yet to encounter a single instance of an automotive engine

block that could not be drained of coolant. Yes, a small amount is

always left behind, but that amount is on the order of a pint or less,

not a few quarts.







You've never worked on a... snipped list







You appear to be thinking that I said that all engines have block drains.. I

did not.



Read my post above: I said all blocks COULD BE DRAINED. The method of drain

is up to the manufacturer.



EVERY vehicle on your list has a way to drain the block (even if

inconvenient).

EVERY vehicle on your list has a coolant change interval. As I asserted all

along.

I didn't say there was not a specified change interval and you DID

say all engines have block drains - and the only way tototally drain

SOME of the engines I listed is to remove the engine os stand the

vehicle on end. - or remove the engine mounts, or other similar very

unlikely methods.

Well, he did say that some methods that you would have to do
might be inconvenient. I wonder what he thinks happens when
you take one of those cars in to a service shop? I can see
it now, customer gets a $1500 bill because they pulled the
engine to turn it upside down and drain it...... I'm sure
that goes on all the time.....

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:13:26 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

wrote in
:




I didn't say it was a better coolant all-round - just better at
removing heat.



Actually, it's not. Not in the way that automotive engines need it to be.
Go read Ray Bohacz's article.

I'll partially summarize what I remember from Bohacz's article: Plain water
has too much surface tension. High surface tension means that the boundary
layer is too tenacious, and tends to change phase (boil) before it can be
stripped away to be replaced by cooler water. Once the water changes phase,
heat transfer essentially stops, and localized overheating begins.

So you add a surfactant/ wetting agent like water - wetter (redline)
or equivalent to the water.


Learn to READ.
I have been a mechanic since the
sixties, and have taught both high school and trade level auto
mechanics - I DO know what I'm talking about.



Go read Ray Bohacz's article.

If you're truly the teacher that you claim to have been, then you will be
intrigued that there might be information out there that you may not know.




I didn't say there was not a specified change interval and you DID
say all engines have block drains



I did not say that. On Wednesday the 28th I said that if the engine did not
have a block drain that it was meant to drain through the rad. Which was
incorrect, of course: some engines require that you pull the lower rad hose
for a block drain.



- and the only way tototally drain
SOME of the engines I listed is to remove the engine os stand the
vehicle on end. - or remove the engine mounts, or other similar very
unlikely methods.



Or just pull the lower rad hose, which is what I discovered when I looked
up all the engines you mentioned.
And how do you drain a reverse flow lt1 or l99??? Both rad hoses
enter the top of the engine.

" wrote in
:

Tegger should take that up with Prestone. They make
a radiator flushing product, been selling it for decades.
Here are the instructions:

1.With engine off and cool, remove radiator cap.* Drain radiator then
close draincock.

2.Pour entire contents of Prestone© Super Radiator Flush into radiator



If your engine is so far gone that you need to employ a chemical flush,
then the possible slight damage caused by running pure water for 10 minutes
is the least of your worries.


--
Tegger

On 8/28/2013 6:34 PM, Tegger wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote in
:

On 8/28/2013 6:07 PM, Tegger wrote:


That antifreeze gets old. The surface-tension-reducers,
anti-corrosion additives, and other critical chemicals get used up or
degrade. ALL reasonably-modern automotive engines have coolant-change
intervals for this reason. ALL of them.

It's actually more important on older engines where there is no
coolant recovery bottle.



ALL modern engines have coolant-replacement intervals. ALL of them.

Yup, and so do the oldies.

I'd go so far as to say that every automotive fluid has a replacement
interval, but sometimes the manufacturer's idea of what the lifetime of
the vehicle is is shorter than you plan on keeping it. (think about
that for a second, it actually makes sense.)


I am unaware of ANY automotive engine sold into the North American market
without a recovery bottle since about the late '70s. Maybe even before then

Some of us have cars built before then


The oxygen in the air in the top tank of the
radiator tends to degrade the coolant faster



The coolant degradation I'm talking about has nothing to do with oxygen
(although oxidation can be an issue), but instead has to do with preventing
boiling at the fire rings. Each time the coolant is brought to "nucleate
boiling" (DAGS), a little of the additives are consumed. Eventually
consumption reaches the point where replacement of the coolant is necessary
or additives must be replenished.

Ray Bohacz covered this very issue in a recent issue of Hemmings Classic
Car. Last couple of months. You could look it up.

Don't doubt that... I remember reading his columns in the sister mag,
forget what it was called, Muscle Machines maybe? Had a subscription
for a while but let it lapse, not for any good reason, just didn't have
time to keep up with the scene anymore. He seemed like he had a pretty
good handle on things.

My only point was, today we're accustomed to multi-year coolant
replacement intervals. The old 50's and 60's stuff was designed to have
the coolant replaced every year; if you don't want to do that, I would
retrofit a 2-way rad cap and a bottle.

nate

wrote in
:


And how do you drain a reverse flow lt1 or l99??? Both rad hoses
enter the top of the engine.



I just Googled that engine. It turns out that you've found the one single
weirdest, most exotically oddball cooling system on the planet.

If you're trying to use this single weirdo example to invalidate everything
I've said up to this point, that's pretty pathetic.

Based on this new information, let me revise and condense what I said
earlier:
"/Just about/ ALL engines have blocks that can be drained. There are one or
two weird and drug-addled examples where this is extremely difficult or
impossible to do, and owners of such vehicles are masochists and/or have
more money than brains. But then they did buy expensive and exotic
vehicles, so what did they expect?".

--
Tegger

Nate Nagel wrote in
:



I'd go so far as to say that every automotive fluid has a replacement
interval, but sometimes the manufacturer's idea of what the lifetime
of the vehicle is is shorter than you plan on keeping it. (think
about that for a second, it actually makes sense.)


Clare Snyder just twigged me to the GM LT1 engine, which, for some very
psychedelic reason, has not got any kind of convenient coolant change
procedure at all.

The LT1 is the cooling-system equivalent of being the only person on the
planet with a certain devastingly-awful genetic defect. How rich,
masochistic, or status-seekingly clueless do you have to be to buy one of
those things in the first place?


--
Tegger

On Thursday, August 29, 2013 7:23:49 PM UTC-4, Tegger wrote:
" wrote in

:



Tegger should take that up with Prestone. They make

a radiator flushing product, been selling it for decades.

Here are the instructions:



1.With engine off and cool, remove radiator cap.* Drain radiator then

close draincock.



2.Pour entire contents of Prestone© Super Radiator Flush into radiator







If your engine is so far gone that you need to employ a chemical flush,

then the possible slight damage caused by running pure water for 10 minutes

is the least of your worries.





--

Tegger

Non response noted. I gave you Prestone, which has 50+ years of
experience with auto cooling systems. They clearly say you can
run an auto on water for 10 mins at idle when flushing. If that
advice was wrong, you'd think they would have been sued out of
business. Their coolant flush product is in every auto parts
store in the country, Walmart, everywhere. We'd all
like to see your reference that says using water for 10 mins
to flush an engine is going to damage it. Like CL, I've done
it on cars and had zero problems.
engine.

" wrote in
:

We'd all
like to see your reference that says using water for 10 mins
to flush an engine is going to damage it.


Note my actual wording above: "possible slight damage".

Running pure water DOES cause damage. But that damage is cumulative. Ten
minutes is nothing; two years would be substantial. My reference is the Ray
Bohacz article that nobody wants to bother reading.


--
Tegger

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:23:49 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

" wrote in
:

Tegger should take that up with Prestone. They make
a radiator flushing product, been selling it for decades.
Here are the instructions:

1.With engine off and cool, remove radiator cap.* Drain radiator then
close draincock.

2.Pour entire contents of Prestone© Super Radiator Flush into radiator



If your engine is so far gone that you need to employ a chemical flush,
then the possible slight damage caused by running pure water for 10 minutes
is the least of your worries.
Tegger doesn't know anything he can't read in a book, or in the
"coles notes" version of the book on the internet.

Chemical flushes are the only way to get rid of even moderately severe
scale and rust buildup in a cast iron block - and getting rid of the
scale and rust buildup is the only way to reduce or eliminate the,zone
boiling he was ranting about a few messages back.

As I said before, obviously not a mechanic.

On Thursday, August 29, 2013 8:01:12 PM UTC-4, Tegger wrote:
" wrote in

:



We'd all

like to see your reference that says using water for 10 mins

to flush an engine is going to damage it.





Note my actual wording above: "possible slight damage".



Running pure water DOES cause damage. But that damage is cumulative. Ten

minutes is nothing; two years would be substantial.


I believe we were talking about changing antifreeze and flushing
a cooling system. That process should be 10 mins, not 2 years.
I think everyone has acknowledged that running water for any
extended period, ie normal operation is a bad idea.



My reference is the Ray

Bohacz article that nobody wants to bother reading.
--

Tegger

If you provide a link, I'll take a look.

wrote in
:


As I said before, obviously not a mechanic.



And you're clearly no kind of technician.



--
Tegger

Tegger wrote in news:XnsA22BD7E11D55Ftegger@
208.90.168.18:

wrote in
:


As I said before, obviously not a mechanic.



And you're clearly no kind of technician.




If you have rust and scale in /any/ modern engine, then you're either
lacking in maintenance technique and materials, or have bought from the
wrong automaker.


--
Tegger

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:39:08 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

wrote in
:


And how do you drain a reverse flow lt1 or l99??? Both rad hoses
enter the top of the engine.



I just Googled that engine. It turns out that you've found the one single
weirdest, most exotically oddball cooling system on the planet.

If you're trying to use this single weirdo example to invalidate everything
I've said up to this point, that's pretty pathetic.

Based on this new information, let me revise and condense what I said
earlier:
"/Just about/ ALL engines have blocks that can be drained. There are one or
two weird and drug-addled examples where this is extremely difficult or
impossible to do, and owners of such vehicles are masochists and/or have
more money than brains. But then they did buy expensive and exotic
vehicles, so what did they expect?".
So now a Chevy Caprice is an "expensive and exotic vehicle"???And
Honda Civics and CRVs too? (also "reverse flow" cooling.) (K series
engines)

Admit it. You were wrong. You stated categorically that anyone who
didn't drain the block through the block drains that all engines are
equipped with was a hack (paraphrased, but accurate translation of
your drivel)

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:56:53 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Nate Nagel wrote in
:



I'd go so far as to say that every automotive fluid has a replacement
interval, but sometimes the manufacturer's idea of what the lifetime
of the vehicle is is shorter than you plan on keeping it. (think
about that for a second, it actually makes sense.)


Clare Snyder just twigged me to the GM LT1 engine, which, for some very
psychedelic reason, has not got any kind of convenient coolant change
procedure at all.

The LT1 is the cooling-system equivalent of being the only person on the
planet with a certain devastingly-awful genetic defect. How rich,
masochistic, or status-seekingly clueless do you have to be to buy one of
those things in the first place?

And remember, the little L99 is the same. And quite a number of other
late model, moderately high performance engines use reverse cooling
for very sound engineering problems. MAny more will in the near
future.
Admit it tegger, you are beyond your depth.

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:54:18 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:13:26 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Go read Ray Bohacz's article.

I would read Ray's article if I had a Hemmings Subscription. By the
way, it's in the August 2013 issue - which I do not have, as I am not
a subscriber.

I'll partially summarize what I remember from Bohacz's article: Plain water
has too much surface tension. High surface tension means that the boundary
layer is too tenacious, and tends to change phase (boil) before it can be
stripped away to be replaced by cooler water. Once the water changes phase,
heat transfer essentially stops, and localized overheating begins.

So you add a surfactant/ wetting agent like water - wetter (redline)
or equivalent to the water.


Water Wetter" is designed to reduce hot spots in your cylinder head.
It does this by reducing the build-up of water vapor in any
superheated areas. The bad thing about having hot spots in your
cylinder head (read combustion chamber) is that they can promote
pre-ignition - definitely a bad thing. This harks back to Smokey
Yunick's theory of "soft combustion chambers". Any sharp edges in
your combustion chamber (around valve seats for example) may tend to
get very hot (even red hot) during operation. These areas of the
combustion chamber can then form local hot spots in the cooling
passages. Thus, even though your bulk coolant temperature is well
below its boiling point (i.e. your gauge reads just fine), there may
be localized boiling in some regions of the coolant tract.

This localized boiling can cause a layer of water vapor to form over
the hot spot. This vapor forms an insulative blanket and prevents
heat from leaving this area, thus making the hot spot even worse. But
reducing the surface tension of the water makes it easier for vapor
bubbles to leave the surface of the cylinder head and allows the
bubbles to convect heat away from the area. Something that changes
the surface tension of a liquid is called a "surfactant". It does not
take very much surfactant to significantly change the surface tension
of water. Hence, you do not need to add very much "Water Wetter" in
order for it to do its job.

An additional benefit of using "Water Wetter" (in conjunction with
100% water) in you cooling system is that water has an extremely high
heat capacity. Thus a gallon of 100% water can carry more heat away
from you engine than an equivalent gallon of 50/50 water and coolant.
Water also has a high thermal conductivity which increases the
convection of heat away from the coolant passage walls and into the
free stream of the liquid flowing through the passages.

From:
http://www.e30m3project.com/e30m3per...ter_wetter.htm


And are you also aware that "vapour phase" cooling is more efficient
than liquid cooling?? It takes a LOT more heat to cause a liquid to
boil than it does to raise the temperature of the liquid. Water's
latent heat of vapourization is just over 970 BTU per lb. That means
it takes about 5 times as much heat to boil a pound of water as it
does to heat water from freezing to boiling. So vapourizing that bit
of water does more to cool the hotspot than heating the water would -
as long as 212F is not a critical temperature to the engine component.

Not saying that localized boiling is good for today's automotive
engines - but vapour phase cooling is as old as the internal
combustion engine and as modern as tomorrow.

The What and Why
of Waste Heat Recovery

One of the most important equipment components in an engine driven
equipment installation, particularly Co generation installations, is
the Waste Heat Recovery System. This system must be designed to FIRST
provide positive engine cooling and SECOND obtain maximum economical
heat recovery while insuring reliability and longevity of equipment.

As a "rule of thumb," reciprocating engines are 30% efficient. That
is, of the fuel energy input; 30% goes to shaft horsepower; 30% to
jacket water heat; 30% to exhaust heat; and 10% to radiation, oil
heat, and other losses.

One of the oldest and most successful forms of heat recovery employs
VAPORPHASE (ebullient) cooling of the reciprocating engine. The
process of the Ebullient cooling involves the natural circulation of
jacket water at or near saturation temperature and engine cooling is
accomplished through utilization of the heat of vaporization. This is
the simplest and least costly form of waste heat recovery.

Some of the benefits of VAPORPHASE cooling are, elimination of the
jacket water circulating pump, extended engine life due to uniform
temperatures throughout the engine (normally 2-3 degrees differential
between inlet and outlet), recovered heat in the form of low pressure
steam (up to 15 PSIG) and all of the heat rejected to the jacket water
is recovered.

- From http://www.vaporphase.net/about.htm
You want to do some real scholarly reading on the subject of
"nucleat boiling" in internal combustion engines???

Read
http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/13356...plications.pdf.

You don't even need a subscription. Nucleat boiling already serves a
very strong role in automotive engine cooling, and will become much
more commonly exploited in the future.

Want some more reading to educate yourself on the physics of boiling,
and the science of automotive coolants/cooling???

Read this: http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc.../chem03987.htm

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 01:16:02 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Tegger wrote in news:XnsA22BD7E11D55Ftegger@
208.90.168.18:

wrote in
:


As I said before, obviously not a mechanic.



And you're clearly no kind of technician.




If you have rust and scale in /any/ modern engine, then you're either
lacking in maintenance technique and materials, or have bought from the
wrong automaker.
When you are a professional mechanic / technician you work on
vehicles of all kinds - from all manufacturers, and with all levels of
maintenance. Not all customers follow the manufacturer's
specifications, or take their mechanic's advice.
So you need to be prepared to service and repair vehicles in all kinds
of conditions.
So you NEED chemical flushes for some vehicles. It returns the cooling
system to serviceable condition - at least partly undoing the "damage"
done by inadequate serviceing. It is part of the maintenance teqnique
and materials REQUIRED to service some vehicles.

And if you do a coolant flush and change without actually flushing and
cleaning the cooling system, and you leave 25% of the old coolant in
the engine, you are comitting fraud. You can get away with that on
your own car, but not on a customer's car.

It's been 41 years since I got my mechanic's licence - 10 years of
that spent as a dealership service manager. Hundreds of happy,
satisfied customers. Because I made sure their vehicles were properly
and effectively serviced.