If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
what the outcome is on using any anti-freeze / coolant that is not
recommended for your car is possibly a gamble, but if you use the coolant recommended you shouldn't expect trouble. but anymore you have to tie the two together (car / coolant), it isn't as easy as it use to be, just grab a gallon and run. and I didn't realize until just here recently that the silicate in the yellow jug of prestone coolant was hostile to water pumps. this situation may not be peculiar to only prestone. m h o *v ƒe |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
> wrote in message ... and I didn't realize until just here recently that the silicate in the yellow jug of prestone coolant was hostile to water pumps. this situation may not be peculiar to only prestone. m h o v fe Look...lets see if we can get it a little straighter. Silicate has always been in 'green' coolant and its purpose is as a corrosion inhibitor for aluminum parts. Some water pumps have been made of aluminum.. Nicht wahr? Silicate is not intended to protect iron or steel. When excess silicate was used in a formulation, or when certain types of hard water were used to fill the radiator, silicate precipitation could be problematic. (Magnesium in the water is particularly incompatible.) Precipitates are never good in a cooling system.. They can block radiators, AND they can be abrasive. MANY times I have seen radiators plugged with silicate precipitate. It is DIFFICULT to remove. OAT technology, as used in Dexcool, did not contain silicates. That was seen to be an advantage in one sense, but probably did not provide the protection to aluminum parts that was desirable. Therefore Hybrid OAT , or HOAT, evolved. HOAT contains silicate, but in reduced amounts compared with the older green formulas. The city water here contains little magnesium or other hardness ions. I have used green coolant in my Dodge van for a long time and there is no trace of a problem. We used Dexcool in my wife's Buick because we knew the damn plenum was likely to go, and I didn't want chicken**** GM to have an arguing point in case the car were still in warranty. Now, that episode is over. I would have no fear about changing to HOAT, or even to Green, now. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
> Edward Strauss wrote: blah blah blah I love Fords but it's just my opinion but I wouldn't > own one and I have no sense of humor etc... You are a joyous one, aren't you?! FYI, I just got off the phone with Ford, as instructed. They said they can't waste any time looking up stats for the venerable 1.9 as they're knee deep screwing up new engine designs. The only reason I could see that you would have made the flip statement "I'm no internet expert, but..." is to imply that *I* was. You can't expect me to let that one go, considering all of the advice I give out on CAR REPAIR based on ACTUALLY REPAIRING CARS FOR A LIVING! What do you do here? Bitch about ballast resistors? Why don't you go to the Car and Driver forums if you want to talk about cars? Feel free to ask questions here about car repair if you want to. Hey, go to whatever forum would best match your field of expertise and dole out accurate info there. But to imply that I don't know car repair -- coming from you -- is pretty rich -and- quite petty. Recap: The OP had already received satisfactory replies; he needed no more input. I made a response in good fun to a poster about his ride. He replied in good fun, actually agreeing. Smily emoticons were tossed out like candy at a parade. The fact that you've seriously replied 3 times to a fun post just floors me. I'm out. Toyota MDT in MO |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
Comboverfish wrote: > there are died in the wool loyalists out there who can't see that the 1.9 is a POS. > People who "run these into the ground" live with the burdon of > replacing/reconditioning the head on a regular basis and just accepting > unhealthy engine noises, coolant leaks, oil leaks, constant MIL on, > etc. A person at work has a 1.8L Mazda Protege with slightly under 300,000 miles, no engine work. I don't see any blue smoke or smell hydrocarbons from it. My 1.9L has less than 75K. How soon can I expect trouble with it? I read that Ford had redesigned the block to fix head gasket failures before the Ford/Mazda Escort was introduced in 1991, so if it still has head problems, it must have been absolutely awful in the earlier years. OTOH Ford also managed to cut 3 HP, despite introducing the welded tubing intake manifold, so maybe I shouldn't expect much. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
larry moe 'n curly wrote: > A person at work has a 1.8L Mazda Protege with slightly under 300,000 > miles, no engine work. I don't see any blue smoke or smell > hydrocarbons from it. Ironically, these engines will burn oil eventually if you don't keep up the oil changes with regularity. This is commonly pointed out by import haters, but not a problem if you change your oil 4 times a year. These folks seem to prefer headgasket, cooling system, and lower engine failures every 100k to 150k because they save money on oil changes. > My 1.9L has less than 75K. How soon can I expect trouble with it? I > read that Ford had redesigned the block to fix head gasket failures > before the Ford/Mazda Escort was introduced in 1991, so if it still has > head problems, it must have been absolutely awful in the earlier years. > OTOH Ford also managed to cut 3 HP, despite introducing the welded > tubing intake manifold, so maybe I shouldn't expect much. You said you drive it very gingerly, correct? If you don't run it like the average commuter driver, then you probably won't see the typical valve seat cracking/dropping problems that plague this engine. You can still expect premature waterpump leaks/failure, premature radiator leaks, oddball EFI and MIL problems, junk lifters, overheating and cooling fan/relay/circuit problems, etc. And that's just the engine-related stuff. I'm not a fan of the Escort, but did cut my teeth on them as a kid learning to fix cars, so they served a purpose for me. I've told my two current Escort customers to get rid of their cars around 100,000 miles or before their second timing belt. They can get expensive to keep, unless you want to stack up reams of nagging problems and drive it into the ground. The 'little' problems these things typically amass are the kinds of problems that accelerate major breakdowns. Toyota MDT in MO |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
larry moe 'n curly wrote: > Plus the 1.9L doesn't bang > valves if the timing belt fails. Rationalizing, rationalizing. If that is to insinuate that the 1.8L *is* an interference engine --- no, the 1.8 freewheels if the timing belt breaks. That's a just-for-the-record-kind-of-thing. Toyota MDT in MO |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
Comboverfish wrote: > larry moe 'n curly wrote: > > My 1.9L has less than 75K. How soon can I expect trouble with it? I > You said you drive it very gingerly, correct? Because redlining an 88 HP engine just doesn't impress anybody. > If you don't run it like the average commuter driver, then you probably > won't see the typical valve seat cracking/dropping problems that plague > this engine. You can still expect premature waterpump leaks/failure, > premature radiator leaks, oddball EFI and MIL problems, junk lifters, > overheating and cooling fan/relay/circuit problems, etc. And that's just > the engine-related stuff. Yikes! That's sad for an engine that had already been in production for over ten years when I bought my car. >I've told my two current Escort customers to get rid of their cars >around 100,000 miles or before their second timing belt. They can get >expensive to keep, unless you want to stack up reams of nagging >problems and drive it into the ground. The 'little' problems these >things typically amass are the kinds of problems that accelerate major >breakdowns. I plan on buying a Civic, Mazda3, or Toyota Matrix in a year or two. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
DexCool
"y_p_w" > wrote in message ink.net... > Or one could go the typical Japanese manufacturer's route. > They seem to prefer silicate-free but with good amounts of > phosphate. Phosphates are supposed to be real problematic > with hard water though. One of the old ways to analyse for phosphate was to precipitate it as magnesium pyrophosphate and weigh the dried residue. For such a method to be useful, the salt formed needs to be practically insoluble. That will give you an idea of why phosphates can be problematic. The big problem, as I see it, is protection of aluminum and its alloys. Silicate is one of the few anions that will give aluminum protection (and it isnt perfect either). It is too bad that its solubility quirks cause so many problems. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Heater core -Al or Cu? | Jon C | Technology | 6 | January 23rd 06 05:32 PM |
Pesky radiator leak...can't decide what to do | [email protected] | Technology | 22 | December 1st 05 06:18 PM |
Pesky radiator leak...can't decide what to do | [email protected] | Honda | 23 | December 1st 05 06:18 PM |
THM400 2-3 shift hesitation; G-05 coolant and intake mfld gasket | Henry | Technology | 7 | March 16th 05 05:57 AM |
General Motors Dex-Cool problem | kr0 | Technology | 7 | March 4th 05 07:18 PM |