 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / September 2006Freeze Plugs or Core Plugs
I have a 2000 Dodge Durango with a 5.2L Magnum engine. At 42,000 miles, on March 29, 2005, it started leaking anti-freeze coolant. The dealer indicated that 3 of the 10 freeze (core) plug were leaking due to corrosion. Then, at 64,000 miles, on August 24, 2006, it happened again but this time only 2 of the 10 freeze (core) plug were leaking due to corrosion. Is this a defect? I am having a hard time understanding how could this leak so easily and so quickly. Is this a design problem with the SUV Truck? Thanks for your responses. In article <1157170614.068203.118580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, > I have a 2000 Dodge Durango with a 5.2L Magnum engine. At 42,000 miles, > on March 29, 2005, it started leaking anti-freeze coolant. The dealer [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > so quickly. Is this a design problem with the SUV Truck? Thanks for > your responses. Sounds more like a lack of maintenance. The 5.2 has been around since 1967, if this were a design problem, it would be well known. >In article ><1157170614.068203.118580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >The 5.2 has been around since 1967, if this were a design >problem, it would be well known. I agree too that it is a maintainance issue. When you get freeze plugs leaking, it is usually a sign of improper antifreeze mixture that is letting corrosion take place. When a few leak the others are not far behind. There is a few thing you can do to mitagate it thought in future. Run more than 50/50 antifreeze for one because 50/50 is not enough somethime for good protection (I alway use at leat 60/40 and usually 70/30). I have a 52 year old tractor that I run about 80/20 or more in because I do not want to have to worry about corrosion in it as parts are rare. I have not changed the coolant since I got is over 20 years ago when I put 80/20 of better in it fresh and it is still clean as day I did it and tractor sees about about 30 to 50 hrs of usage a year even today. It never over heat on the even the hottest days bush hogging (I do though) When I top it off once a year I always use pure antifreeze too There will be those that aurgue the higher antifreeze levels are not best but this is simply no true and it will cool fine and protect even better. Antifreeze is densor and has a higher abilty to abosurb heat to. It does take less energy to boil gycol and convert it to steam than water and hence where the some say water cools better but in a liquid state is takes more energy to raise a gallon of glycol one degree than it does water and therefore more "energy" to cool it since it stores more heat. You could also use a lower pressure cap to lessen strin on plugs and minimize leaks when they occur. I have been using 7 to 9 PSI caps for over 20 years and I never have any heating issue even when traveling through the great plains in 100 degree plus heat with 70/30 mixtures as higher levels of gycol also raises boil point too negating the need for higher prssure for boil over prtection. In theory if you ran pure antifreeze you would not even need a pressure cap as it boils around 340 degrees though in a pure state is freezee around 10. (ethylene glycol which is coomon anti freeze) As a foot note if you use propylene glycol (non toxic anti freeze as marketed) it has it highest boil point and lowest freeze point in its pure state with no water added and is used is severe artic cooling requirements. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com I have been following this thread (and many others!) and can no longer remain silent while such wholesale BS is propagated through this newsgroup. I would caution the OP to dismiss the Snomans reply in its entirety since it is absolute hogwash! > I agree too that it is a maintainance issue. When you get freeze plugs > leaking, it is usually a sign of improper antifreeze mixture that is > letting corrosion take place. It is highly likely that it is indeed a maintenance issue, but NOT due to the incorrect antifreeze mixture. The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" posted below. More than likely, the freeze plug failure is due to corrosion from infrequent cooling system service. Your owner's manual recommends an initial antifreeze change at 3 years or 45,000 miles and every two years or 24,000 miles thereafter. Antifreeze does two things... keeps the engine from freezing in winter and also contains corrosion inhibitors and silicates to promote internal engine health. Over time, the antifreeze properties remain relatively constant but the anti-corrosion compounds break down and are no longer effective which leads to cooling syetm failure thus the need for periodic coolant service. Now, onto the BS. When a few leak the others are not far > behind. There is a few thing you can do to mitagate it thought in > future. Run more than 50/50 antifreeze for one because 50/50 is not > enough somethime for good protection Unless you live in the extreme north, NEVER run more than a 50-50 mixture of antifreeze and water. A 50-50 mixture of coolant will give you ALL the corrosion inhibitors you need to keep your cooling system at peak efficiency if it is maintained properly. A 50-50 mixture will provide freeze protection down to -34 degrees F which is adequate for most of the US and Canada. If your climate requires, you can go to a MAXIMUM of 70-30 antifreeze and water, but this is rarely needed and offers NO benefit other than additional freeze protection. (I alway use at leat 60/40 and > usually 70/30). I have a 52 year old tractor that I run about 80/20 or > more in because I do not want to have to worry about corrosion in it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > days bush hogging (I do though) When I top it off once a year I always > use pure antifreeze too This is sheer idiocy. Why would you abuse your equipment when using the proper coolant ratio and periodic changes are so easy? Just because it has worked for you means that you are lucky, it doesn't mean that you are correct. You cannot determine through visual inspection the amount or effectiveness of the corrosion inhibitors remaining in the coolant. A hydrometer will only show freeze protection. There will be those that aurgue the higher > antifreeze levels are not best but this is simply no true and it will > cool fine and protect even better. This is simply not true in spite of your belief that it is. Antifreeze is densor and has a > higher abilty to abosurb heat to. It does take less energy to boil > gycol and convert it to steam than water and hence where the some say > water cools better but in a liquid state is takes more energy to raise > a gallon of glycol one degree than it does water and therefore more > "energy" to cool it since it stores more heat. This is pure BS! Therrmodyamics 101. The ability of a material to conduct heat is called thermal conductivity. It is usually expressed as W/m K. The thermal conductivity of water is .67 and the thermal conductivity of ethylene glycol (antifreeze) is .25, thus water is significantly better at transferring heat. The ability of a material to "store" heat is called its specific heat. It is usually expressed as kJ/kgK. The specific heat of water is 4.184 and the specific heat of ethylene glycol is 2.38, thus again, water is much better at storing heat than antifreeze. Only one other liquid comes to mind that is better as a coolant than plain water and that is mercury. You could also use a > lower pressure cap to lessen strin on plugs and minimize leaks when > they occur. At last, a correct statement, but this approach is a band-aid at best. I have been using 7 to 9 PSI caps for over 20 years and I > never have any heating issue even when traveling through the great > plains in 100 degree plus heat with 70/30 mixtures as higher levels of > gycol also raises boil point too negating the need for higher prssure > for boil over prtection. You have not had a problem because of your cleverness, you have just relied on dumb luck In theory if you ran pure antifreeze you > would not even need a pressure cap as it boils around 340 degrees. However, you run a significant risk in engine overheating because the pure ethylene glycol cannot carry the heat away from the engine fast enough, nor can proper heat transfer occur through the radiator due to the physical properties mentioned above. This is simply bad advice! > though in a pure state is freezee around 10. (ethylene glycol which is > coomon anti freeze) As a foot note if you use propylene glycol (non > toxic anti freeze as marketed) it has it highest boil point and lowest > freeze point in its pure state with no water added and is used is > severe artic cooling requirements. The bottom line is this. Do NOT take what Snoman says as gospel. I have seen on too many occasions that his advice is flat-out wrong. I don't know where he gets his information, but it is NOT from knowledgeable professionals. I have remained silent up to this point, but I can no longer sit quietly while such mis-information is spread in this group. Snoman, your participation in this group is welcome however, please take the time to verify that the info your provide is correct and is based upon sound engineering principles and recognized industry practices. To do less does the readers of your posts a great disservice. I hope this clairifies the information in this post. Mike DaimlerChrysler Serviec Manager Member Society of Automotive Engineers [big snip] > Mike > DaimlerChrysler Service Manager > Member Society of Automotive Engineers Mike's signature says it all. Notwithstanding *good* shadetree mechanics (I use the term with affection), one does not become a service manager and a member of ASE without knowledge. Kudos to Mike, Tom (and many others) who offer their decades of experience and wealth of knowledge! Bryan >I have been following this thread (and many others!) and can no longer >remain silent while such wholesale BS is propagated through this newsgroup. >I would caution the OP to dismiss the Snomans reply in its entirety since >it is absolute hogwash! Mike, I wholeheartedly second your post. You saved me a bunch of typing. <G> I don't know where ole Snowy comes up with this stuff, to somebody that doesn't know better it sounds good but it just misses the mark. Denny > I have been following this thread (and many others!) and can no longer > remain silent while such wholesale BS is propagated through this newsgroup. [quoted text clipped - 122 lines] > DaimlerChrysler Serviec Manager > Member Society of Automotive Engineers I am very appreciative of all your time and responses, but the logic about the maintenance does not make sense. As stated above, it was not 2 years yet between the two leak occurrences (March 2005 to August 2006 = 17 months). It also has not been 24,000 miles yet between the 2 leak occurrences (42,000 miles and 64,000 miles = 22,000 miles). Even if I brought the SUV in to the dealer earlier to replace the coolant, the corrosion already took place prior to the maintenance cycles. Both leak problems occurred before each of the recommended maintenance cycles. If I had the opportunity, I would have brought the truck in for maintenance, but it leaked first prior to both maintenance cycles. I can give you guys more background on this if needed. I am interested in keeping my Durango a long time so I am looking for a long term solution. Thanks JS > I have been following this thread (and many others!) and can no longer > remain silent while such wholesale BS is propagated through this newsgroup. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > DaimlerChrysler Serviec Manager > Member Society of Automotive Engineers Mike I have a Chrysler 2001 LHS with 11,000 miles on it. It is driven perhaps once week. So should I replace the coolant yet? Bob AZ >> I have been following this thread (and many others!) and can no longer >> remain silent while such wholesale BS is propagated through this [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Bob AZ Yes! The corrosion inhibitors wear out as a function of mileage AND time. Mike > The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is >the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" >posted below. THis is the problem stero types. Detriot uses 50/50 still because over millions of vechicle you save tens of millions of dollars a year for profit. THere was a time that detriot said 40/60 was best too. The problem is aggrevated by the mixed metal contect in engine blocks that increase galvanic reactivity and water is very reactive too. The less of it the better. THe BS is is where people blindly folow detriot that wants you to by another car in 3 or 5 years or take it in for servicing. The last thing they want to do is build one that really lasts and reduces demand for their products. I keep some vehicle a very long time and I could send you pictures of overflow tanks and radiator that are as clean as they day they were built 17 or more years ago from using 70/30 but you would say that they were doctored or that I used a new or cleaned ones so knock yourself out. Also by your BS people living in northen states are screwd because 50/50 will not cut it and even 60/40 will not either in a few areas and I for one have lived once where 40 below and colder was common in winter and 50/50 whould hae been worthless. You want to was your money you can but do not dismiss something as BS because you do not understand the physics behind it. Detriot loves lambs to can be easily lead to slaughter. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com Cuisinart Grind & Brew 10 Cup CoffeemakerOn Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:20:12 >> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is >>the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >----------------- >TheSnoMan.com sigh. another expert. lol. what a moron. >sigh. another expert. lol. what a moron. I have electrical and mechanical engineering background yours is likey pure BS. I would expect a answer like yours from someone that is really clueless on how and why things work. What you do not understand you dismiss as BS and attack the source of it.. Knock yourself out if this is the only way you can get your fix.. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>sigh. another expert. lol. what a moron. > > I have electrical and mechanical engineering background yours is likey > pure BS. What school/university did you attend??? What degree do you have??? The answer to this and the v-10 timing concern will shut a bunch of us up. Of course, no answer to either one will result in that pure BS you're talking about.. Denny I would expect a answer like yours from someone that is > really clueless on how and why things work. What you do not understand > you dismiss as BS and attack the source of it.. Knock yourself out > if this is the only way you can get your fix.. > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com >>sigh. another expert. lol. what a moron. > >I have electrical and mechanical engineering background yours is likey >pure BS. i do have a bs degree a.s clown. what degree do you have? not that a degree really means much but since you brought it up........ > I would expect a answer like yours from someone that is >really clueless on how and why things work. wtf are you talking about? what are you referring to anus? > What you do not understand >you dismiss as BS and attack the source of it.. no, not really. i just attack you because you are sooo much fun to pitch sh.t on. but then you pretty much ask for it with the stupid sh.t that you write. > Knock yourself out >if this is the only way you can get your fix.. oh come on. it's not the only way. it's certainly one way, but not the only way. anyway, thanks for the permission. just saying man. >----------------- >TheSnoMan.com >>sigh. another expert. lol. what a moron. > > I have electrical and mechanical engineering background. Notice that Hole did not say he had a degree in anything only a background. I'm sure we all could testify to the fact that Hole has a degree in BS. >> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is >>the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" >>posted below. < Bullsit sniped> > Detriot loves lambs to can be easily lead to > slaughter. Hole, what Detriot really loves is fools like you who post wrong info and cause folks to damage their cars or truck. Now answer the question's!! Start with the V10 thread! >Hole, what Detriot really loves is fools like you who post wrong info and >cause folks to damage their cars or truck. Again Detriot loves these lambs. You know they spend a lot of time and writing the owners manual at a low enough comprehension level for you guys to read and take as the bible. If you would REALLY read you might learn something. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>Hole, what Detriot really loves is fools like you who post wrong info and >>cause folks to damage their cars or truck. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > guys to read and take as the bible. If you would REALLY read you might > learn something. Hole, I do want to learn something. Why don't you answer the questions in the V-10 thread? > Also by > your BS people living in northen states are screwd because 50/50 will [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com I have lived in northern MN, and ND for all my 47 years and a 50/50 mix works fine. In fact even less will get you by, but the coolant may turn to slush on the coldest days. And believe me, I have seen -40 more than once! Greg >> Also by >> your BS people living in northen states are screwd because 50/50 will [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > slush on the coldest days. And believe me, I have seen -40 more than once! > Greg Yup, 50-59 works pretty well here in New England. You have to remember we are dealing with Hole here. Roy > Yup, 50-59 works pretty well here in New England. You have to remember we > are dealing with Hole here. > > Roy 50/59?? What the hell is that! ;-) Greg >> Yup, 50-59 works pretty well here in New England. You have to remember we >> are dealing with Hole here. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 50/59?? > What the hell is that! ;-) 9 more than 50 I guess. Roy > Greg >I have lived in northern MN, and ND for all my 47 years and a 50/50 mix >works fine. In fact even less will get you by, but the coolant may turn to >slush on the coldest days. And believe me, I have seen -40 more than once! >Greg Not wise it starts to slush at minus 34. If you were realy that on the ball with this you would not be risking 50/50 at 40 below. The only thing that saved you is that when anti freeze freezes it goes through a slush stage first for a while and rated freeze temp and has to get a lot colder to get solid. I promise you that if you take a bucket of 50/50 and set it outside at 40 below, you will have a big slushy not liquid. Detriot has got to love you guys. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>I have lived in northern MN, and ND for all my 47 years and a 50/50 mix >>works fine. In fact even less will get you by, but the coolant may turn to [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com Never had any trouble at less than 50/50. Never had a slushy at 50/50 either. I had a slushy once with a vehicle with maybe a 20/80 mix at -20 after it sat overnight. It was a company truck that someone else was in charge of. I found out that the mix was light! It never froze hard enough to break anything, but I had to take my time starting the engine 4-5 times until the coolant would flow through the radiator. Trust me 50/50 will never be a problem or we would have had cracked farm equipment engine blocks every winter! Sno, don't you find it strange that you are all alone on this, and many other points?? Can you find ONE reputable source to back you claims?? Please post the links!  SignaturePoorUB '05 Ultra Classic '06 MAMBM SnoMan in a epileptic fit stamped out the following: > > The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is > >the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > millions of vechicle you save tens of millions of dollars a year for > profit. <Bullshit Snipped> Yes you are correct, it is a VAST CONSPIRACY created to make you spend your money every two years for new coolant!!!!!!! Thus they came out with OAT coolant to make you pay.....EVEN MORE HAHAHA! No wait, that extended the intervals..... Better double up the layers on your tinfoil hat snoboy. Now for those who have a brain and arent conspiracy nuts, what good is clean coolant if the pH balance is f.cked? I have a 20+ year old bottle of battery acid on the shelf. It is as clear as they day it was bottled, doesnt mean I want it in my cooling system like snoboy does. Anyone who actually works on cars for a LIVING knows that the "apperance" of coolant doesnt mean jack sh.t! How many more conspiracy theorys does this kook have? The bad thing about this troll is how can you stop feeding him? Its a never ending cycle of bad advice that has to be corrected continuously! > SnoMan in a epileptic fit stamped out the following: >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > you stop feeding him? Its a never ending cycle of bad advice that has > to be corrected continuously! I guess if a thread is tossed up every so often it will warn the unsuspecting of Holes BS. This group police's itself real well anyway. Roy > > The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is > >the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > physics behind it. Detriot loves lambs to can be easily lead to > slaughter. Mores Law. "If more is good, too much is just right." I suspect that your practice of running high anti-freeze concentrations relates directly to you using propane/butane in your vehicles air conditioning; you can't get either to work correctly because of your lacking skill set so you hack a repair using non-standardized (and in one case, illegal and dangerous) butcher techniques. In the trade, you're known as a "Bubba." Anybody else notice sno never replies directly to someone with the credentials to know what they are talking about? Things that make you go hmmmmmmm. >> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is >>the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com > Anybody else notice sno never replies directly to someone with the > credentials to know what they are talking about? Things that make you go > hmmmmmmm. yup we have noticed. that's the problem he wont answer the questions. here ill ask again, and yes SnoMan I'm going to ask until you answer. tell me where I can find a "Knock Sensor" on a 8.0L v10 (488) you claim or imply its there. Signature---------------------------- -Chris 05 CTD 06 Liberty CRD Real Trucks don't NEED spark plugs. "> >> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is >>the IDEAL ratio and should be adhered to in spite of anecdotal "evidence" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > millions of vechicle you save tens of millions of dollars a year for > profit. The manufacturers use a 50-50 mizture based upon testing and chemical analysis. It has been proven to be the IDEAL ratio based upon millions of vehicles sold... nothing more. By your analysis then, the anifreeze manufacturers should want to increase sales by recommending a higher ratio, right? Visit any antifreeze manufacturers website and you will see that the recommended ratio is 50-50. Are they not interested in profit.... please explain that dichotomy? In fact many offer a pre-mixed product in a 50-50 ratio? If they like every other business was only interested in profit would they not offer a 70-30 products as you suggest? Please explain that if you can. THere was a time that detriot said 40/60 was best too. The > problem is aggrevated by the mixed metal contect in engine blocks that > increase galvanic reactivity and water is very reactive too. The less [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > but do not dismiss something as BS because you do not understand the > physics behind it. I don't understand the physics behind it? That's a hoot! I'm a degreed engineer with a major in EE and a minor in physics. I have been employed in the auto industry for over 35 years, the last 18 with DaimlerChrysler. I am ASE certified, I am a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers, I am on the advisory board of the local voactional college and a member of the advisory board for DaimlerChrysler training. Those are my credentials, what about yours? Sorry to say this Snoman, but the others are right.... you are making yourself look like a fool... it's very sad... very sad, indeed. Mike Detriot loves lambs to can be easily lead to > slaughter. "'tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt..." Mark Twain > "> >>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > I don't understand the physics behind it? That's a hoot! I'm a degreed > engineer with a major in EE and a minor in physics. No wonder you have this infatuation with heated leather seats.... <VBG> Denny >> "> >>>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Denny smartass! ;^) Mike >> "> >>>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > No wonder you have this infatuation with heated leather seats.... <VBG> Do ya think ol' tender toosh has tested them yet? There have been some cool nights. <VBG> Roy >>> "> >>>>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > Roy Yes, ol' "tender tush" has tested them in prepartaion for winter... can't be too careful I always say..... at least when y'all are freezing your Yankee a.ses off mine will be nice and toasty... thank you very much! ;^) Mike >>>> "> >>>>>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Mike I find that a stop at Taco Bell about 2am when plowing keeps mine nice and warm... Denny >I find that a stop at Taco Bell about 2am when plowing keeps mine nice and >warm... > >Denny Wouldn't it be a lot cheaper to make 2 taco bell stops and just drive an ATV backwards instead of that big truck with a plow? Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>>> "> >>>>>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > be too careful I always say..... at least when y'all are freezing your > Yankee a.ses off mine will be nice and toasty... thank you very much! Well, this is one Yankee who's a.s will only be freezing for one more winter. After this one I'm on the beach. Except for visits of course. Roy > ;^) > > Mike >>>>> "> >>>>>>> The factory recommended 50-50 mixture is [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > Well, this is one Yankee who's a.s will only be freezing for one more > winter. After this one I'm on the beach. Except for visits of course. Good move! Mike > Roy >> >> ;^) >> >> Mike >Yes, ol' "tender tush" has tested them in prepartaion for winter... can't be >too careful I always say..... at least when y'all are freezing your Yankee [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Mike Hope it's a short walk from the heated truck seats to the heated office seats.... wouldn't want a lot of condensation forming.... Mac https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm >>Yes, ol' "tender tush" has tested them in prepartaion for winter... can't >>be [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > seats.... wouldn't want a lot of condensation forming.... > Mac Hmmmmm? Heated office seat? Now THERE's a thought........ ;^) Mike > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis > https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm OH GOD!!!!!!!! >>>Yes, ol' "tender tush" has tested them in prepartaion for winter... can't >>>be [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis >> https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm > Unless you live in the extreme north, NEVER run more than a 50-50 mixture of antifreeze and water. A 50-50 mixture of coolant will give you ALL the > corrosion inhibitors you need to keep your cooling system at peak efficiency [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > antifreeze and water, but this is rarely needed and offers NO benefit other > than additional freeze protection. Mike, not quite correct, check this URL... http://www.shadowstuff.com/ Look down the left side for "Technical stuff" then "Antifreeze and you" You can see that 60% is the max for minus temps. Admittedly 70% is not far from it, but since we are tossing around facts, I just wanted to get your story absolutely straight for you. Dave >> Unless you live in the extreme north, NEVER run more than a 50-50 mixture >> of antifreeze and water. A 50-50 mixture of coolant will give you ALL [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Dave Dave: Thanks for the reply! It would seem that the folks at Prestone have a bit of disagreement with your 60% figure. See: http://www.prestone.com/carcare/faq.php#q3 also, the folks at Peak also indicate that 70% is the max ratio for freeze protection, See: http://www.peakantifreeze.com/images/art_protection_chart.jpg Hmmmmm.... curious.... I read your link and it appears this came from a study by the University of Alaska. Those folks should know above freeze-ups IMHO so there is a bit of controversy isn't there? Suffice it to say that the max ratio is somewhere between 60-70% coolant/water and everyone should be happy except perhaps for Snoman who I suspect still maintains that pure antifreeze is OK. Thanks for keeping me honest! ;^) Mike Ya got me. :-O Just goes to prove that one Swallow, does not a Summer make! Anyone seen Snoman?? LOL Probably soldering up radiators. Dave > >> Unless you live in the extreme north, NEVER run more than a 50-50 mixture > >> of antifreeze and water. A 50-50 mixture of coolant will give you ALL [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > Mike >>> Unless you live in the extreme north, NEVER run more than a >>> 50-50 mixture of antifreeze and water. A 50-50 mixture of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >>> rarely needed and offers NO benefit other than additional >>> freeze protection. At a 50-50 mix freeze protection is -34F, and boilover protection is at +265F. At 70:30 freeze protection is at -84F and boilover protection is at 276F. Hence there may be no added anti corrosion benefits, but in *either* very hot or very cold weather there is significant advantage to maintaining a maximum antifreeze to water mixture. Note that the 70-30 mix is indeed the maximum, and going higher will in fact reduce the freeze protection. (Or, it will with ethylene glycol based anti freeze. But that is not true of propylene glycol antifreeze.) >> Mike, not quite correct, check this URL... Actually, he is precisely correct... and so are *all* of the sites listed below! There actually is no conflict! (There's trick to it, though...) >> http://www.shadowstuff.com/ ... >> You can see that 60% is the max for minus temps. ... >Thanks for the reply! It would seem that the folks at Prestone have a bit >of disagreement with your 60% figure. ... >http://www.prestone.com/carcare/faq.php#q3 ... >http://www.peakantifreeze.com/images/art_protection_chart.jpg > >Hmmmmm.... curious.... I read your link and it appears this came from a >study by the University of Alaska. Those folks should know above freeze-ups >IMHO so there is a bit of controversy isn't there? UAF people definitely know, and no there is absolutely *no* controversy! (I lived near Fairbanks for two decades, and saw -70F there, and didn't consider -60F to be "odd". Rest assured that the _average_ mechanic in Fairbanks knows more about antifreeze than most folks ever begin to imagine!) >Suffice it to say that the max ratio is somewhere between 60-70% ... Heh heh, want to know what the trick is? The "coolant" being talked about can be either of two things, 1) is the "antifreeze" as it comes out of the jug you buy, or 2) the actual ethylene glycol "antifreeze" that is the ingredient which provides freeze protection. 70% for the first, and 60% for the second. The "coolant" you poor out of the jug is not 100% ethylene glycol because it has all those corrosion inhibitors added. If that liquid is mixed 70:30 with water, what you will get is a 60:40 glycol water mix. Confusing to say the least, but in either case what they are referencing is a 60:40 ethylene glycol mixture by weight. SignatureFloyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com >>>> Unless you live in the extreme north, NEVER run more than a >>>> 50-50 mixture of antifreeze and water. A 50-50 mixture of [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > Confusing to say the least, but in either case what they are > referencing is a 60:40 ethylene glycol mixture by weight. Thanks Floyd! I hadn't considered the additive package. Your "trick" makes sense! Mike > In article > <1157170614.068203.118580@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > The 5.2 has been around since 1967, if this were a design > problem, it would be well known. I am very appreciative of all your time and responses, but the logic about the maintenance does not make sense. As stated above, it was not 2 years yet between the two leak occurrences (March 2005 to August 2006 = 17 months). It also has not been 24,000 miles yet between the 2 leak occurrences (42,000 miles and 64,000 miles = 22,000 miles). Even if I brought the SUV in to the dealer earlier to replace the coolant, the corrosion already took place prior to the maintenance cycles. Both leak problems occurred before each of the recommended maintenance cycles. If I had the opportunity, I would have brought the truck in for maintenance, but it leaked first prior to both maintenance cycles. I can give you guys more background on this if needed. I am interested in keeping my Durango a long time so I am looking for a long term solution. > I am having a hard time understanding how could this leak so easily and > so quickly. Do you flush your cooling system every two years/24,000 miles? > > I am having a hard time understanding how could this leak so easily and > > so quickly. > > Do you flush your cooling system every two years/24,000 miles? I am very appreciative of all your time and responses, but the logic about the maintenance does not make sense. As stated above, it was not 2 years yet between the two leak occurrences (March 2005 to August 2006 = 17 months). It also has not been 24,000 miles yet between the 2 leak occurrences (42,000 miles and 64,000 miles = 22,000 miles). Even if I brought the SUV in to the dealer earlier to replace the coolant, the corrosion already took place prior to the maintenance cycles. Both leak problems occurred before each of the recommended maintenance cycles. If I had the opportunity, I would have brought the truck in for maintenance, but it leaked first prior to both maintenance cycles. I can give you guys more background on this if needed. I am interested in keeping my Durango a long time so I am looking for a long term solution. > I am very appreciative of all your time and responses, but the logic > about the maintenance does not make sense. You bought the truck (or someone did - maybe you bought it used) in 2000. The first leak occurred in 2005. Was there any cooling system maintenance performed between 2000 and 2005? > > I am very appreciative of all your time and responses, but the logic > > about the maintenance does not make sense. > > You bought the truck (or someone did - maybe you bought it used) in 2000. > The first leak occurred in 2005. Was there any cooling system maintenance > performed between 2000 and 2005? Hello Tom: I bought it in Oct 2002 on the dealer's lot. It had less than 15K miles on it. Yes the 1st leak occurred in Mar 2005 at 42K. >From Oct 2002 to Mar 2005, I did not perform coolant maintenance on it because it was only 3 1/2 years and at 42K miles. I do not know for sure about the coolant from 2000 to 2002 when the dealer had the truck on the lot. Maybe I should have asked. But, if the dealer never changed it either, then the coolant would have been in the truck for over 5 years!!! Oh my! But, still, why did it happen again a second time right now at 64,000 mi on Aug 29 2006? I hope this make sense. JS > on the lot. Maybe I should have asked. But, if the dealer never changed > it either, then the coolant would have been in the truck for over 5 > years!!! Oh my! Yep. Not good for any coolant (IMO), but especially not the green stuff... > But, still, why did it happen again a second time right now at 64,000 mi > on Aug 29 2006? I hope this make sense. Because the damage was done already. Even if the new coolant stopped the corrosion on that core plug, the heat/cool cycles on an already-corroded plug will eventually wear it out. If I were you, I'd replace all the core plugs, but first I'd do a THOROUGH cooling system flush (I suspect that when the first plug was changed, they simply dropped the coolant and replenished it). This will help to clean out all the crud that I'm sure is floating around the coolant passages. As far as replacing the rest of the plugs, if two failed - you can expect more. It's a hard lesson to learn, but this is why people stress regular coolant flush/changes.... even on the supposed 5-year, 100,000 mile coolant. While the new coolant does hold up longer, I'm not willing to believe it lasts that long. I just flushed mine ('03 CTD) at 60K, and the flush water came out nice and clean the first time - but still, piece of mind is worth a couple of dollars in coolant, and some time. >> on the lot. Maybe I should have asked. But, if the dealer never changed >> it either, then the coolant would have been in the truck for over 5 [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > water came out nice and clean the first time - but still, piece of mind is > worth a couple of dollars in coolant, and some time Amen Tom! I too have an '03 CTD and even though it has the 5 year/100K HOAT coolant I will be changing mine shortly too at 60K miles. In frequent cooling system service can be expensive to repair and as you surmised, I suspect there was still a lot of residual corrosion in the OP's cooling system which caused the 2nd failure so soon. I probably see two or three vehicles a week with premature cooling system failures and sadly, this problem can be easily and cheaply avoided. Mike . > >> on the lot. Maybe I should have asked. But, if the dealer never changed > >> it either, then the coolant would have been in the truck for over 5 [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > Mike > . Thank you all! I now have a good picture on what occurred: It's not just the mileage...it's the time as well that's equally important. Even though my truck was at 42K miles it was also 5 years old without a coolant flush. If the dealer never changed the coolant when I bought it in Oct 2002 with 15K miles and I never did a coolant flush until the core plugs failed in Mar 2005 at 42K miles, then it was way overdue by the TIME factor. I will take it to get flushed more often (maybe every 6 months) to be sure the cooling system is clean. Now, I worry about my radiator. -JS > I have a 2000 Dodge Durango with a 5.2L Magnum engine. At 42,000 miles, > on March 29, 2005, it started leaking anti-freeze coolant. The dealer [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > so quickly. Is this a design problem with the SUV Truck? Thanks for > your responses. Response to All: After reading your responses, I thank you all! I now have a good picture on what occurred: It's not just the mileage...it's the time as well that's equally important. Even though my truck was at 42K miles it was also 5 years old without a coolant flush. If the dealer never changed the coolant when I bought it in Oct 2002 with 15K miles and I never did a coolant flush until the core plugs failed in Mar 2005 at 42K miles, then it was way overdue by the TIME factor. I will take it to get flushed more often (maybe every 6 months) to be sure the cooling system is clean. Now, I worry about my radiator. As for the mix, I just use the recommended by the manufacturer. If they are wrong shame on them and they will be hurting all their customers and their revenue stream $$$$$. BTW: I live in San Antonio TX, it's very hot but not many cold days below 32 F. -JS Hello everyone I found another post on dodgetalk.com on what else could be the problem. Check this out. ...and I quote: '99 Durango (@48K miles) with 3 leaking freeze plugs within a week of my dealer replacing my water pump, thermostat, and gaskets, because of a leak at the thermostat housing and pump (?). Now, back at the dealership service department, one service person mentioned that Chrysler had a bad batch of freeze plugs, and that probably explains my plugs going bad so soon. Another person at the same dealer said that some of the Durangos were assembled in Mexico and that the water that was used in the cooling system when the vehicles left the plant for the U.S. was bad. Needless to say, now I hear that my extended warranty does not cover freeze plugs, that the tranny has to come out, and that I'm looking at about $1K minimum on the repair. Anyone else run into this situation so early in the life of a Durango V8? Is it chronic to the model, or just my vehicle that is going south, taking my wallet with it? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.