I stand corrected.
So, what does WW do and how does it work?

 

They claim that by lowering the surface tension, the bubbles are eliminated or reduced, and that there is more effective heat transfer (which will occur from the water alone) overall - as I said above, though, it may just be old-school - the benefits claimed are that one can increase spark advance without detonation - but on CC'd (computer-controlled) cars, that is easier said than done, and there is no "Predator" equivalent for the S2000 allowing easy changes as there is for the Cobras. If the head just dumps more heat into the coolant, wqe all know what Honda ECM's do - they cut back the timing. It is a crap shooit and we are dancing in the dark a bit, and I seriously question whether that tiny bottle has nearly enough of ANY corrosion inhbitor to do the job of protecting thser precious Al parts.

 

RR,

It seems that you are only looking at part of the heat transfer cycle. If you consider that the engine has a fixed amount of heat that must be dissipated through the coolant instead of a fixed temperature, it makes more sense that WW could be helpfull. If you look at a hypothetical controlled test, where identical engines are put under the same amount of load for a period of time, the amount of heat energy created by both engines will be equal. If you assume that the air temp, flow, and radiators are identical for both engines, then the temperature of the radiator fins will have to be equal to dissipate that equal amount of heat. The temperature of the fins will be dependant on the design of the radiator, temp of the air, humidity, etc.

Where things start to change is in the temperature of the coolant and engine based on the heat capacity and tranfer characteristics of the coolant. With a standard 50/50 coolant mixture, the coolant will have more of an insulative behavior than that of straight water with a surfactant. Because of this, there will be a larger delta T between the engine and coolant, and between the coolant and the radiator fins. This means that the standard 50/50 coolant mix will have to be hotter than the WW mix for the same rate of heat production, and ultimately a hotter head temperature.

I know I'm not explaining it very well, but it is 5 PM here at work (Beer-Thirty).

EDIT: A good example is CPU cooling. The temperature of the heat sink is dependant on its design and the power usage of the CPU. The use of heat sink grease has no effect on the temperature of the heat sink, but it has a LOT to do with the temperature of the CPU. If a perfect heat sink grease was available, then the temperature of the CPU, grease, and heat sink would all be equal. The same is true about engine coolant. If you had a coolant with perfect heat transfer characteristics, the head temp, coolant, and radiator would all be the same exact temperature.

 

Gernby: I do not disagree with what you posted, i just do not understand what your point is. If you review what Red line claims for this product (or at least did the last time I read it), it is all about reducing heat in the heads to allow more spark advance - any other thermal characteristics are secondary as I read it. Certainly, a plain water fill will increase the cooling system's efficiency and heat exchange capability, up to the point where its physical limits are reached, beyond which 'ungood' things happen. R U saying it is of benefit for tracking because it ups the stock cooling system's heat transfer rates? If the stock system does not cool adequately, that is indeed a good thing. I was just trying to resolve the product mfr's statement of purpose against the practical reality of the S2000's operating mechanics. I think we are in violent agreement about the benefits of water + a little something compared to water + a lot of ethylene glycol. But for the street, there are serious ramifications of the water + a little something does not provide SIGNIFicant anti-corrosion properties.

 

I can't defend any claims about corrosion protection. However, I do have enough faith in Redline that they wouldn't risk law suits and / or a damaged reputation over such a relatively small product. Their suggestion to use an 80% water / 20% anti-freeze coolant mix with WW surely doesn't boost the sales of WW much, but it does put them at great risk if it wouldn't provide proper corrosion protection. Also, it doesn't take much of a surfactant to do its job. A few drops of pure surfactant would probably be enough, so I expect that corrosion inhibitors take up most of the bottle. Anybody know what percentage of a bottle of antifreeze is taken up by corrosion inhibitors?

With regards to the performance benefits, I have verified via OBD-II that the timing curve in my '02 is about 10% more advanced than my friend's '02 during regular street driving. The only differences between my mods and his are that I had a 20/80 coolant mix with WW while he had a standard mix, and I had IK24s while he had stock plugs. I don't know which of those 2 differences played the biggest role...

 

You may want to check into Evans coolant water substitue.
http://www.evanscooling.com
This is what I use.

 

Is Evan a reputable guy? Is his product as good as gernby's "Super Coolant" additive (rat piss) or Road Rage's "Ultra Coolant" additive (boar mucus)?

 

I first learned of Evans through diesel engine racing application because of extreme cylinder wall heat. It is known though out the racing industry and carried in reputable speed shops.