Re: R/L Water Weter

[Steve Rowe <srowe@xxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 03:04:21 EST
>From: BMWROSS@domain.elided
>
>I've been interested in trying WW for a while because my 2.3L cooling system
>can be challenged by my 2.7L engine. I was intrigued by one observation
that a
>little detergent pobably would have a similar effect. Now Steve's post omes
>along & adds to my confusion:     
>
>> Example: In the summer, my Jeep Cherokee temp gauge will start to creep
>>  over the 210(f) degree point in 100(f) degree weather with A/C on and
stuck
>>  in traffic. This is with the standard 195(f) thermostat. After adding R/L
>>  WW, I have not seen the temp get to 210 at all. In the fall, it takes a
>>  very long time for the temp gauge to get to the normal operating area if
>>  R/L WW is in the system. So I drain and flush every year so I get heat in
>>  the late fall/winter and add R/L WW after the weather starts to get hot.
>>  
>Asuming WW works by bridging the gap between metal & water, wouldn't it make
>the water jacket warmer quicker in the winter as it more rapidly draws heat
>off the block & head?  Not an opinion, an honest to goodness question. 
>
>Ross
>83 323i/2.7

Ross,
You are not the only one confused when this happens. I thought the same
thing when the first cold fall day came around. My only assunption on this
is that the cooling system on my Jeep does not flow real well. With this
lack of flow, the water in the water jacket remains in contact for a longer
period of time, thus temps go up. With the R/L WW, the flow remains the
same but the heat is absorbed/shed faster by the radiator. The temp sensor
for the gauge is on the raditor, so as long as the thermostat is doing its
job the engine is fine. The lack of heat during winter is do to the
shedding of heat by the radiator (my opinion).

I may be all wrong on this physics of this situation but the OBSERVATIONS
are factual. (Just the assumptions are the variables: )
Steve

------------------------------