fbpx

 

Greetings! My first post on this forum. :)

I received notification from my aircraft manufacturer of Rotax TR-IM 912-001R1. Page 6 states that IMPORTANT:
Waterless coolant formulations (Evans, or others) are NO LONGER APPROVED for use in any 912 or 914 engines equipped with the "New Style" (2013 or later) cylinder heads.
(see the TR documents for complete details...)

See: http://legacy.rotaxowner.com/manuals/tr-im-912-001-r1.pdf page 6.

I was wondering if anyone had an idea of the technical reason for this reversal.

Even though Evans Waterless coolant was the recommended coolant, it was left to the manufacturer to put in whatever they prefer...P&M Aviation puts 50/50 conventional in their aircraft.

Last summer I was having an issue with my engine boiling the coolant in the #4 cylinder head after shutdown and forcing a fairly large amount (1-2 oz.) of coolant into the recovery bottle. Upon cooling to ambient, the system couldn't draw this much coolant back into the system leaving the expansion tank low.

After changing to Evans, I've not had this issue. The engine runs 10 degrees warmer with Evans but is still well within tolerance (200 degrees F even on the warmest days).

Gotta say, I'm not excited about this...

Thanks in advance.
Chris
  • Re: 912 and "waterless coolant"

    by » 10 years ago


    I am just guessing;
    -Waterless coolant is thicker so it flows through the system at a slower rate, maybe the new heads with the increased coolant galleries around the exhaust port do not work well with this. I will try and find out if this is true or not.
    Waterless coolant does have benefits but it also has some negatives:
    -it is expensive and hard to find in many parts of the world
    -It readily leaks, like penetrating oil.
    -After a few hours in the engine it looks and feels like oil, this is confusing when you get a leak.

  • Re: 912 and "waterless coolant"

    by » 10 years ago


    Thanks for your follow-up Rob! As I mentioned, I do have the new heads and regular 50/50 coolant wasn't treating me too well. Since the switch to Evans, I've had no problems or cooling system anomalies. Unless there's a compelling reason to change back to conventional coolant, I'd rather stay with what's working.

    Thank you again and will await a definitive answer before moving forward.

    Chris

  • Re: 912 and "waterless coolant"

    by » 10 years ago


    Evans also carries a 20F-30F heat penalty. It may not boil over as easily, but it puts many people over the max temps. 50/50 does a better job of heat exchange. Some coolant exchange between the expansion tank and reservoir may be normal in some climates, but it mat also be an indicator that something needs to be done about your cooling system.

    Roger Lee
    LSRM-A & Rotax Instructor & Rotax IRC
    Tucson, AZ Ryan Airfield (KRYN)
    520-349-7056 Cell


  • Re: 912 and "waterless coolant"

    by » 10 years ago


    The Quik line of aircraft and their systems are pretty tried and true. I'm now wondering if the coolant that came loaded from the factory was over diluted...it was a pale blue. This might explain how it ran at 170 F and then boilef water in the head after shutdown. Do you fellas concur?

  • Re: 912 and "waterless coolant"

    by » 10 years ago


    Yes, sounds like a good explanation.
    Or the rad cap is not holding 1.2 bar? that would decrease the boiling point.

    Thank you said by: Chris Wills

You do not have permissions to reply to this topic.