Todays Dexcool pic.

[PeteTheFarmer]

Originally Posted By: toocrazy2yoo

Well, Pete, it didn't say it WAS changed either.


Nor did I say it was changed, so maybe we should examine all possibilities.

Originally Posted By: toocrazy2yoo
Look at it. It couldn't have been. It couldn't possibly have even been looked at.


So simply by one picture, you can tell it was not only never changed, but never examined. Impressive

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: George7941


Dexcool problems are easily avoided by me because
1) My cooling system is airtight and I will make sure it stays airtight.


To me, an engineering solution that REQUIRES an automotive cooling system to be airtight under all the various field conditions that cars encounter is a POOR engineering solution. Whenever I don't work in the automotive field except as a hobby, but I'm an engineer and when I design any system, I make sure that it can survive and continue to function under the real-world conditions it encounters, and without placing excessive demands on either the operators or the support infrastructure (in this case, it would be new and improved radiator cap designs).

Quote:

So far we have been focusing on Dexcool problems and not on its benefits.
1)Cooling systems stay sparkling clean with no green goo or phosphates or silicates precipitating out of the coolant.
2)Water pump seals last longer because there are no abrasives precipitating out of the coolant.
3)The coolant itself lasts longer. I will not go for 5 years but I will change the coolant out every three years.


All those benefits apply to G-05, without any of the drawbacks. Ford, Chrysler, Cummins, Mercedes, etc. looked at the big picture and made the optimum decision. GM, Toyota, etc. for whatever reason, did not. And whether or not they have "fixed" the problems, they'll continue to pay the price for making a poor choice for a long time to come- automotive legends like "synthetic oils won't allow rings to seat during break-in" and "DexCool corrodes everything" take years, sometimes decades, to die away.

Just my opinion.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: toocrazy2yoo

Maybe this attitude of mine is borne of my background in Naval Air repair and maintenance, especially out on the Carriers, a large part of which is simply corrosion control. The rules of aviation maintenance are written in blood, with cars, much less so, but surely sloppy maintenance in cars is redeemed in cash. Hey, I get it. Schools have no more auto shops, no one knows how to turn a wrench, no one knows how anything works, no one can work with their hands anymore. Thankfully for the dealers and repair shops, those "average" folks that don't know anything practical and aren't curious enough to learn still know how to open their wallets. And that's just tough luck for them. But they DO make their own luck. Cars are like that..

I for one, refuse to grant them a pass by blaming the coolant.


You know, I absolutely AGREE with you on the need for proper maintenance. I think that basic automotive maintenance should be part of the requirement for getting a driver's license. People who don't know that the engine oil light means "pull over NOW" versus the alternator light meaning "go to a shop and get it checked ASAP" put my life in jeopardy on the road. People who continue to drive with their brake pedal pulsating and the steel pad backing plate grinding on the rotor REALLY put my life in danger on the road.

But on the other hand, let's go to your carrier analogy. Suppose there are two aircraft vying to be the next carrier-borne fighter. They both perform about the same in the air, but one has a maintenance procedure that says, "after each arrested landing, the aircraft must be completely washed-down with distilled water, and must not be exposed to salt in any form until the next flight," but the other one has the same corrosion prevention procedures as the good ol' F/A 18. Its just a maintenance procedure right? Do you "refuse to blame the corrosion inhibition design" on that aircraft when it corrodes due to an incomplete washing or exposure to some salt mist while in the hangar deck? Or do you say "the manufacturer could have made better choices?"

People should maintain their cars, yes! But carmakers shouldn't use fluids that require screwey maintenance procedures, or have requirements that they *know* will be violated constantly in the real world. ESPECIALLY not when there are alternatives available!

 

[Propflux01]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum

.....People should maintain their cars, yes! But carmakers shouldn't use fluids that require screwey maintenance procedures, or have requirements that they *know* will be violated constantly in the real world. ESPECIALLY not when there are alternatives available!
Exactly!!!

This same analogy was presented in a similar thread. Some just don't seem to understand it. However, it is nice to see that other people actually DO understand!

 

[bullwinkle]

[/quote]

All those benefits apply to G-05, without any of the drawbacks. Ford, Chrysler, Cummins, Mercedes, etc. looked at the big picture and made the optimum decision. GM, Toyota, etc. for whatever reason, did not. And whether or not they have "fixed" the problems, they'll continue to pay the price for making a poor choice for a long time to come- automotive legends like "synthetic oils won't allow rings to seat during break-in" and "DexCool corrodes everything" take years, sometimes decades, to die away.

Just my opinion. [/quote]The scary thing is, I wouldn't bet GM even knew for sure that there was a problem-until all the sludge & gasket failures in the field. Not hard to believe from a bankrupt company.

 

[440Magnum]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
The scary thing is, I wouldn't bet GM even knew for sure that there was a problem-until all the sludge & gasket failures in the field. Not hard to believe from a bankrupt company.


Weeeellll..... That doesn't "scare" me about GM's practices very much. I'm sure GM did a lot of accelerated testing that showed no problems or more likely manageable problems with fielding Dexcool. But there are some things that you really can't catch in the test phase- you have to turn your new design loose in the wild and let the monkeys beat on it to see if its really going to break (I know this from experience...). What bothered me more is the fact that they just kept sticking with Dex and band-aiding the cooling systems and service procedures instead of going with an alternate solution that was working out extraordinarily well for the companies that chose it. They seemed to have a real bad case of "not invented here" disease when it came to non-Dexcool chemistries.

Betamax/VHS. Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. DexCool/G05...

 

[Sayjac]

Quote:
On the other hand, the previous fill of Prestone "All Makes All Models" smelled terrible and looked mediocre shortly after its installation.
That has not been my experience with Prestone AM/M. I currently have it in two vehicles after a total flush of Nissan and Tacoma.

Coolant still looks great, color looks same, no [censored] on the cap or in res. One about two years, one about 2&1/2. According to Nissan maintenance it's time to flush again soon.

Wish I could (knew how) post pics. That said, I don't think it would change anyone's mind as Prestone AM/M apparently has 2eh.

But, I service/flush my systems regularly

 

[ZGRider]

Originally Posted By: toocrazy2yoo

Maybe this attitude of mine is borne of my background in Naval Air repair and maintenance, especially out on the Carriers, a large part of which is simply corrosion control. The rules of aviation maintenance are written in blood, with cars, much less so, but surely sloppy maintenance in cars is redeemed in cash. Hey, I get it. Schools have no more auto shops, no one knows how to turn a wrench, no one knows how anything works, no one can work with their hands anymore. Thankfully for the dealers and repair shops, those "average" folks that don't know anything practical and aren't curious enough to learn still know how to open their wallets. And that's just tough luck for them. But they DO make their own luck. Cars are like that..

I for one, refuse to grant them a pass by blaming the coolant.


So, let's just examine this analogy -- When GM recommends to change their "improved" "long-life" coolant (Dexcool) in the autos they engineer and manufacture, we should be "smart" enough to disregard this recommendation (5 yrs or 150,000 miles) and change the coolant every 2 or 3 years or 30,000 miles? At the same time we should have anticipated that the radiator cap was allowing air into the system and we should have been intellegent enough to have upgraded it to a higher quality cap? This is how aircraft are maintained on an aircraft carrier? You replace a jet engine part that has a set service interval far before that interval passes? Do you just replace things whenever you think you should? You just disregard the manufacturer's recommendations? What service world is that?
Face it, some of you are either too superstitious, narrow-minded, just plain stubborn to use a product that didn't come from the same auto manufacturer and you will make any excuse to cover your indecision and that is what allowed GM to get away with Dexcool atrocities for better than a decade before they were finally brought to accountability by the courts of law and the court of public opinion. GM will have to file for bankruptcy at the end of May and they have no one to thank, but their greedy, bean-counting marketeers and accountants who chose to continue to use Dexcool in the face of all the problems it was causing.

I say adios to GM and hope that using Dexcool was worth all the grief that they are going to (and have) put this country's auto buyers through. I will happily buy Fords or Chryslers just because they had enough sense to use G-05 coolant.

 

[AlanRebod]

Dexcool isn't really the reason GM is having problems right now. There is much more to look at than a mere coolant scandal.

 

[onion]

I seriously doubt that ZGRider is blaming GM's inevitable bankruptcy on the Dexcool fiasco. I think he's saying that their stubborn adherence to Dexcool is indicative of the company's overall mentality.

Can't say I agree entirely, but it's a valid point. GM has come up with and stuck with some STUPID ideas in the past- Dexcool, plastic intake gaskets, piston-slapper engines being some of the more recent and infamous ones.

Personally, I'd be sorry to see GM go. In my experience, GM products can be excellent vehicles IF you can research well-known inherent design problems and either avoid them or preemptively fix them.

 

[STRAYDOG]

Last spring took rad cap off My wifes 2003 Grand am V6 , had light grey mud stuff on it .........we bought this car new had only 50,000 miles >> bought a Prestone flush kit & cleaned it out replaced with the Prestone good stuff .......all I can say is yuck. The Dex-Cool is not for me always been a prestone repeat customer...........

The Dog "Semper Fi"

 

[Donald]

Originally Posted By: STRAYDOG
Last spring took rad cap off My wifes 2003 Grand am V6 , had light grey mud stuff on it .........we bought this car new had only 50,000 miles >> bought a Prestone flush kit & cleaned it out replaced with the Prestone good stuff .......all I can say is yuck. The Dex-Cool is not for me always been a prestone repeat customer...........

The Dog "Semper Fi"


What is the Prestone "good stuff". Prestone All Makes/All Models?
That is not good stuff, it has 2-EH which is not very good for gaskets.

The only "good stuff" I know of is Zerex G-05 and Peak Global.

 

[onion]

Originally Posted By: STRAYDOG
Last spring took rad cap off My wifes 2003 Grand am V6 , had light grey mud stuff on it .........we bought this car new had only 50,000 miles >> bought a Prestone flush kit & cleaned it out replaced with the Prestone good stuff .......all I can say is yuck. The Dex-Cool is not for me always been a prestone repeat customer...........

The Dog "Semper Fi"


There goes another one of those run-away imaginations.

 

[axlenut]

Shortly after purchasing a new 2006 GMC Sierra 2500HD with the DuraMax diesel with factory Dexcool, I installed a coolant bypass filter using the Baldwin B5134 spin-on. Examination of the filter media after 3,000 miles of service revealed residual core casting sand as the primary contaminate with a few flecks of black material that may have been residual engine block casting scale.

A coolant bypass filter will extract gross aggregations of polymerized coolant, depleated supplemental coolant additive (SCA) flakes, rust or other particulates large enough to cause wear. My primary concern was removal of the residual core sand and casting scale that would erode the pump impeller vanes and shaft seal, hoses, thermostat, block passages and radiator tubing. The B5134 filter will not change the chemistry nor balance pH. There are those filter elements designed with additional SCA pellets as part of the media such as Baldwin's BW5138 controlled release coolant filter that releases BTE additive. Other filters release BTA PLUS additive. These filters are not compatible with extended life coolant however.

Manufacturers of light duty diesel trucks do not equip their diesel engines with coolant bypass filtration as a cost savings measure, although over the road tractors are, and some with two filters. They also fail to equip turbo diesel pickups with pyrometer and boost guages to monitor these important operating parameters. Given that these engines are $8,000 to $11,000 options, monitoring and maintenance are essential.

This week I will have the Dexcool flushed and replaced with Amsoil propylene glycol coolant, a low toxicity extended service coolant with a maximum life of 250,000 miles or seven years. I chose Amsoil because it is available locally, and I use Amsoil in engine, transmission and differentials on all my vehicles. I also use dual bypass oil filtration, oil analysis and now will test the coolant using test strips. With the price of new vehicles and repairs it makes sense to eliminate problems. For the driver of an expensive diesel pickup it's just about essential.

 

[onion]

Good luck with that. Personally, I'd stick with a known quantity for something as important as diesel coolant- rather than some oddball coolant like Amsoil. I don't know how big an issue liner cavitation is for a Duramax- but it's definitely a problem with lots of other diesels. You'll want a coolant that provides adequate protection against cavitation. And being that Amsoil is made for the automotive market- I'm not sure that it would be a good choice (and I personally wouldn't take Amsoil's word for it... as they always claim that their fluids meet every spec. under the sun... which I find hard to believe).

I'd go with something that's proven to work in heavy truck applications- something like Detroit's Powercool antifreeze, Texaco Heavy Duty, or GO5. If you're set on propylene glycol, Cummins sells a PG coolant with SCA's that's formulated to protect against cavitation.

 

[axlenut]

Onion:

I share your caution, which is why I research each product before using.

The Amsoil coolant meets ASTM D-6210, ASTM D-3306, ASTM D4985-98, and ASTM D 6210-98 specifications for Fully Formulated coolants. The ASTM D-6210, D4985-98 and D6210-98 specifications are for heavy duty diesel engine coolants. It shares specifications similar to Cummins Fleetguard PGPlus Concentrate, rated for heavy duty diesel service. The Fleetguard product is also rated for extended service life to the point that it may never need changing when properly tested and replensihed. Fleetguard's description of their product:

"PGPlus™ Premix is a fully
formulated organic Extended
Service engine coolant that
can last the life of the engine if
maintained properly."

Fully Formulated coolant is a term defined as:

"This term describes the new heavy-duty coolants that contain all of chemicals necessary to protect diesel as well as car systems. The ASTM specification for fully formulated coolant, ASTM D-6210, requires simultaneous compliance with all of the previous automotive and heavy-duty specifications. Therefore, this is a true universal antifreeze specification and may be used in any system." (www.imcool.com/articles/antifreeze-coolant/Antifreeze_Glossary.htm)

Based on specific ASTM standards the two products are similar, and should perform well. Cavatation should not be a problem with the heavy SCA package in the Amsoil or Fleetguard product.

Amsoil Products have served me well for the 25 years I have used them, meeting all specifications they claim. This is backed up by lab analysis of the fluids in service. Sometimes their marketing technique appears a bit snakeoil, but its all good stuff.

 

[wgtoys]

Looks just like what happened to our Olds minivan several years ago at around 20k miles. I don't know what [censored] GM put in there, but it sure didn't do the job correctly. A two year old vehicle which has never been abused shouldn't yet require ANY maintenance of the cooling system. GM made a big deal out of the long service life attributes of DexCool, but the product simply didn't live up to the claims in a vast number of non-abusing customer situations.

That minivan is gone now and we went back to driving sedans. The Honda which replaced the Olds is at 90k miles and doing beautifully. I changed out the Honda's coolant once at 50k miles and the cooling system is still nice and clean. No wonder GM is in such deep doo.