You are correct, it is not the engine manufacturers that are doing it but the truck's assembly plants that are messing it up.
Most of the engines supplied to the trucks assembly plants are supplied without a mounting base for a coolant filter. It is the truck assembly plant that decide to install one and with OAT coolants I have seen that some people did not do their job in educating the employees at the plants of what is required when they use OAT Coolants in engines.
At the Truck dealers it's even worse, most of them are not aware of difference between coolant additives they sell for regular coolant. There are only 2 types of coolant additives for regular coolants used in diesel engines. One is molybdate based and the other is Nitrate based.
Molybdate based additives are for used in engines running on pure water and /or a mix of antifreeze with water not exceeding 60% anti-freeze.
Nitrate based additives are for used in engine running with an anti-freeze/water mix with a minimum of 50% antifreeze to a maximum of 67% antifreeze concentration.
The breakdown by engine manufacturer's preferred chemicals for used with regular coolants.
Caterpillar, Detroit Diesel, Perkins, Volvo are reccomending Nitrate based additives.
Cummins, International are recommending Molybdate based additives.
The company that I work for as been educating their customers in all aspects of filtration, coolant additives and proper maintenance for more than 10 years. We educate our distributors and their customers/end users.
I'll give you a hint on who I work for, follow this link...
http://www.baldwinfilter.com/sales/rchar.html
Best regards from Montreal, Canada
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by albaby:
RobertC. I agree with what you say, but if the coolant filters with the additives were left on the engine, I doubt if that was due to lack of knowledge on the engine manufacturers part, buy more likely due to stupidity and lack of quality control at either the point of assembly of the unit or the dealership that delivered the trucks.
Again, I will re-iterate the point that some of the greatest opposition to OAT coolants come from competitors whose very existence may depend on alternatives to OAT coolants.
Penray and Fleethiard come to mind.
I did not put OAT coolant in my Powerstroke until I had a personal chat with two techs from Navistar. The company line was that the coolant "may not be compatible with certain materials in the engine". That certainly wasn't very definitive and I asked for the location and types of the incompatible materials and recieved the stock answer several times. I finally called and arranged for a conference call with two of Navistars techs. The truth was that they could not identify any incompatible materials and did not even have any information on any testing done to identify the possibility of incompatiblity. Now Navistar says ELC can be used with the T444E because they "changed certain materials". When I called and asked which materials they changed so I could make my engine "compatible", the dealer could not give me an answer.
I have had my coolant tested several times to identify any problems that may be developing in the engine. There have been none identified. The testing is quite extensive and costs more than a coolant change would ($35). I am doing it to either prove or refute all the rumors I have heard. So far everything is looking good. I would be happy to send the results of the last test
I have also replaced the hoses and thermostat and have never seen a system so clean. (recycled most of the coolant). I suspect that may also be one of the reasons I have never had any tranny failure even though I have towed my fifth wheel over the best mountains this country and Canada have to offer. Some others have found their tranny failure was due to the accumulation of the additives required for diesels, and silicates around the transmission pancake cooler in the radiator, reducing its efficiency.
As far as OAT causing failure in older engines, particularly those that have not been well maintained, may be due more to the fact that a change in Ph can cause material that was previously sealing a leak to be removed and circulate in the system. A crud burst. Sometimes the chemical flushing otself will expose such problems.That is why a chemical flushing should be done on older vehicles. My 96 was only a year old when I put the OAT in so I did not chemically clean it. (Anyone that has been around long enough to see the change to the "new" detergent motor oils will know what I am talking about.) BTW-what do you teach, and for whom?
Regards
Al
[This message has been edited by albaby (edited 09-20-2001).]</font>