It's not as efficient, your right, but that's not it's advantage. For a WBX
the advantage is NO WATER.   Sierra is not the same thing.  It is intended
to be mixed with water, the Evans coolant is used straight. 1) With no water
there is no head corrosion.  2) With no water there is no pressure cap used.
No pressure = no pressure caused head leaks and no pressure caused heater
leaks and no exploding hoses.
The engine does run hotter.  That is neither advantage nor disadvantage.
The temp at the radiator is irrelevant.  A cooling system needs to get the
heat out of the hottest spots in the cylinder head. For performance engines
this is the advantage. Knocking down these hot spots allows increased
ignition timing without knock, higher turbo boost pressure without knock
etc.  Evans is not snake oil.  It is a very well engineered alternative that
is up against the NIH (not invented here) resistance of the other coolant
mfgs. and the car mfgs.  Go to the site and read.

Gary
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Walker" <jwalker17@EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: Coolant Temps

> > Has anyone tried a correctly engineered propylene glycol coolant?
> The Evans system (no water=no corrosion) sounds very promising.  Check
> it out at: http://www.evanscooling.com/
>
> kinda odd to see the claims that they are making for prop. glycol ....
> what i've heard (and read on the backs of the containers) is that p.
> glycol is NOT as efficient as the ethylene glycol ... that is, a
> e.glycol mix goes to lower temps in winter and higher temps in summer
> (than the p.glycol mix). this sounds like the same old Sierra p.glycol
> mix of a few years ago. the package kinda looks like it, too.
>
> only thing i saw with p.glycol was that it wasn't poisonous to animals
> and people ... the e.glycol is definitely poisonous.  :(
>
> joel
>