An antifreeze antidote?

Today, new confusion has arisen from advancements in vehicle technology. Major automakers have traded in inorganic acid technology (IAT) formulas and are developing their own extended life formulas for new vehicle models.

Ed Eaton, chief engineer at Amalgatech, a professional automotive fluids and heat exchange independent testing lab, explains that Ford and DaimlerChrysler both use Valvoline G-05®, a European-style hybrid formula. Most Japanese automakers use a hybrid formula too, but it is vastly different. And General Motors uses DEX-COOL®, an organic acid technology (OAT) formulation.

Kurt Mittlefehldt, manager of materials engineering with Delphi, says even though some OEMs use the same type of chemistry, chemical concentration and the formulations are extremely dissimilar.

The OEMs' view

It's no surprise that OEMs recommend using only "genuine" parts and chemicals. Antifreeze is no exception to this rule with OEMs expressing new concerns over chemical compatibility.

John Conville, a coolant expert at Ford Motor Co., emphasizes that Ford does not recommend the use of any specific aftermarket coolants in their vehicles (unless approved). "...the only aftermarket coolants that Ford recommends are the appropriate Motorcraft brand engine coolants." With the use of non-approved coolants, Ford is concerned about "corrosion of metals and incompatibility with some of the polymeric materials we use in our vehicles."

With their formulation, the primary corrosion inhibitor is an organic compound, but small amounts of inorganic compounds are added to enhance certain corrosion protection. Max Gates, a safety and regulatory communications executive for DaimlerChrysler, says that most coolant manufacturers produce a version of HOAT and their "approved source list is available to anyone who buys the spec.

"The different automakers select engine coolant to provide good corrosion protection based on the components of the cooling system. Some coolants may not adequately protect all types of engine, radiator, heater core (and other) materials," adds Gates.

Toyota, which has long life and super long life non-silicated products, too, does not advocate the use of non-genuine antifreeze/coolants. Toyota Motor Sales' Bill Kwong in product communications explains that other formulas tested didn't provide the same performance. "Evaluations of competitive formulations have been made in simulation and field tests, showing (Toyota's) product superior in water pump seal protection, leakage and deposit formation." It's uncertain whether he's referring to competitive OEM or aftermarket formulas.

Jay Kankovich, brand quality manager with GM, says their vehicles must use DEX-COOL-approved technology, pointing out there are a number of aftermarket brands to choose from, though they must meet GM specification standards.

Kankovich suggests mixing coolant types isn't ideal: "You can't have a previously silicated coolant where you change over after you had the silicate laid down. The technologies aren't compatible. You will generally end up with the lesser change interval cycle."

One formula fits all?

Despite the OEMs' opinions on coolant usage, aftermarket chemical producers have not been discarded, offering various formulas that provide long life and enhanced corrosion protection. In recent years, universal and global coolants, which tout a "one formula fits all vehicles" approach, have hit shelves, and now line up alongside, or, in some cases, have replaced application-specific HOAT, OAT and IAT coolants.

But, parts distributors wanting to find an absolute answer to coolant compatibility may be hard pressed to do so.

Mike Dwyer, executive director for the National Automobile Radiator Service Association (NARSA), says although there is no industry definition of compatibility, there is a lot of heated discussion on what aftermarket antifreeze really works in specific vehicles.

Eaton from Amalgatech says that from an aftermarket standpoint, "The question is regarding coolant performance in terms of the technology and how it works" not whether something is "universal."

Prestone® Extended Life antifreeze/ coolant for all makes and models is based on organic acid technology; it is phosphate, borate and silicate free. If added to one of the OEM technologies, Prestone says the coolant will take on the life of the lowest denominator, but a complete flush and fill would give users the extended life Prestone's product provides, which is up to 150,000 miles or five years.

Old World Industries Inc., too, makes universal coolants: Peak® Long Life and Peak® Global LifeTime. Their global formula is also based on an organic acid technology. The company's website states that it is fully compatible with and can be used to top-off other extended life coolants including GM's DEX-COOL and the new Ford and Chrysler extended life coolants. It is also said to meet the silicate-free coolant requirements of Asian cars and the phosphate-free requirements of European vehicles. Like Prestone's product, a complete flush and fill is needed to realize Peak Global's full protection, according to their site.

Shell Lubricants Company recently released a multi-vehicle coolant under several of its brands. Their team of experts says it is possible to meet the performance requirements of multiple vehicles with a single coolant offering "through the use of extended life technology and can be done with 'hybrid coolants' that incorporate different technologies together to meet the performance needs."

For anyone who might question a universal formula, Peter Woyciesjes, worldwide R&D manager for Prestone Coolant and chairman on the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) Engine Coolant Committee, says their lab has conducted full ASTM testing with Prestone Extended Life antifreeze/coolant and has run millions of vehicle miles in various makes and models with no issues.

Prestone also says that, in addition to their own testing and third-party verification, they have sold millions of gallons of universal coolant and have not received any complaints.

Peak claims their coolants meet ASTM D-3306 and ASTM D-4340 standards. And Shell conducts basic industry testing, which includes ASTM and Society of Automotive Engineers' (SAE) testing, as well as uses "in-house screening methods to evaluate coolant formulations," says Steven Balfe, technology manager, car care and coolants for Shell Global Solutions, which includes corrosion protection, oxidation resistance, heat transfer, hard water stability, compatibility, cavitation resistance, simulation service, water pump performance and field performance.

Woyciesjes says Prestone's experience working with the automakers has helped them in the aftermarket. "We work with the OEMs to understand the direction of where they are going." Prestone wasn't intended to replace factory fill, emphasizes Woyciesjes, who adds that their close-knit relationship with many automakers gives them insight so they "can develop a fluid that they believe can go into all the various vehicles."

Shell also has factory fill relationships with OEMs in both the light and heavy-duty sectors and maintains relationships with some of the other OEMs.

But, while global formulas have been marketed as solutions for eliminating product confusion and SKU proliferation, they've also generated industry scrutiny.

Last October, Ford articulated that the automaker doesn't believe a universal formula could work properly in all vehicles by distributing a Q&A document to their dealer network and other public channels. It says, "Due to the complexity of cooling systems, no one coolant has been proven to work in all vehicles," and "use of non-approved 'universal' engine coolants may lead to eventual engine damage or failure. Problems caused by the use of non-approved 'universal' coolants may not arise immediately but may occur over longer periods of time due to additive compatibility issues." Conville says they do not have specific test results on such coolants because "there are many different coolants in the North American aftermarket and Ford does not have the resources to test them all."

Some aftermarket chemical makers share stances similar to the OEMs. The Valvoline Co., a division of Ashland Inc. and the maker of Zerex® antifreeze products, recommends following the OEM's formulation suggestions. Valvoline's David Turcotte, technical director of the company's Technology and Product Development division, believes that in some instances of damage, "cause and effect isn't always obvious." Other than the apparent compromises in performance, much of the physical damage caused by improper coolant use is not noticed until the cooling system is dismantled, said Turcotte at a recent product presentation.

Turcotte's concern is that the chemistry most often found in universal coolants is an organic acid technology. According to a Zerex press report from May, "This chemistry works well in its intended application of GM vehicles but DaimlerChrysler and Ford do not want it in their systems. The OAT chemistry was tested by both of these automakers where it did not pass their extended life tests." Turcotte explains that Zerex's three formulas are the same as specified by the automakers.

Chevron Products Company also offers three distinct formulations, marketed under various Chevron and Texaco brand names. Bill Dusing, Chevron Products Company coolant market development specialist, says since they spend a lot of time working with OEMs around the globe, they always make sure people understand how important it is to follow OEM recommendations. "We have a very large global coolants research and technology structure...we do spend a lot of time with OEMs and we know the OEMs, both domestic and foreign, they are going to continue to use and approve and work with you to develop different formulations for their specific cooling system requirements." Their Havoline DEX-COOL antifreeze/coolant was the original brand first introduced to GM as factory fill.

For them, the rationale for not launching a universal formula seems to come down to simple mathematics. With each automaker requiring something slightly, or in many cases vastly, different, Dusing says, there is "no physical, possible way to have a product that is silicate free and contains silicates at the same time" and still meet each OEM's coolant specifications. He suggests the fluid formula that the OEMs use is "in there for a reason."

Both Chevron and Valvoline also state that their products are put through extensive tests to verify that they meet or exceed OEM specifications, in addition to their own internal testing and ASTM standards.

Agreeing to disagree

As you can see, stances vary greatly. Eaton with Amalgatech points out that it's certainly fair to say that the inhibitor technologies that the OEMs use are dissimilar to some of the "universal" aftermarket formulas. "There is certainly an active debate in which some of the companies have agreed to disagree," but he believes each aftermarket company "can present evidence to support their positions."

What might be a bigger issue isn't whether parts distributors should stock universal vs. application-specific, but whether the products are good quality and have met strict ASTM standards, says Eaton, who adds that the major industry suppliers do extensive testing. He doesn't see this issue as being an R&D issue, but a marketing one. He says any consumer buying a gallon of the major brands is getting good quality coolant.

The question, he says, is whether adding a universal coolant to a specific vehicle with a "required OEM" formulation will do damage, and "I'm not aware of anybody having documentation of this in real life." He adds, however, that the potential has been identified in some lab tests but not yet observed in vehicles. "As careful as we are in testing, they are just models and they don't always predict what will happen in the real world."

And independent real-world testing has yet to be done. NARSA, which defers to the vehicle manufacturers on coolant use, isn't aware of any. Executive Director Dwyer does tell us that some radiator makers have had more warranty issues that they've been able to correlate to the use of certain types of coolant, though he doesn't have specific information and he's sure "any OEM radiator supplier or aftermarket radiator manufacturer will be reticent to discuss this."

Visteon, Delphi and Proliance International, all of which supply radiators to both the OEMs and the aftermarket, report no increase in warranty issues in regards to aftermarket coolant use. However, all three suggest consumers follow the OEM's coolant recommendations as these radiator makers perform extensive testing to ensure their products are compatible with the automaker's coolant and other system components. "We test and validate to the OEM's recommendation," reports Dave Patterson, chief engineer of heat exchangers with Delphi.

Proliance International has actually established a working relationship with Zerex, says Layne Gobrogge, the company's VP of marketing support, partially since they don't have coolant chemists on staff. They do run durability testing with coolant but don't test all the available coolants out there.

Turning to Consumer Reports' Consumer's Union Auto Test Center for insight on the issue turned up little. "I have received a couple inquiries about coolants — maybe one or two, not much more," says John Ibbotson, workshop supervisor, adding that, "in the grand scheme of things, coolants are less of an issue as far as fluids so we probably won't do anything for a long time, if at all" with regard to testing.

GM's Lockwood says that consumers need to be careful of what they buy because it's a chemical manufacturer's job to sell coolant and they "enhance their ability to sell coolant by making claims that a coolant is compatible with all the carmakers. We know from the formula that some of them don't work."

Universal: No failures recorded so far

Eaton says that Ford's coolant does require silicates and borates and GM's prohibits these additives. Asian automakers use phosphate but never silicates in their formulas. So, technically speaking from a formulation standpoint, it is not possible to meet all of the OEMs' specifications with one formula.

But he believes that until the market demonstrates some documented negative effect that results from mixing different coolants, the motivation for many of today's coolant makers is to provide the mass merchandiser with what they want, which (in most cases) is one formula. "When you have a one size fits all, there is always a bit of compromise but overall, maybe it's satisfactory," he says.

Phill Porpora, co-owner of Lee Auto Parts, and a member of Aftermarket Business' Editorial Advisory Board, says his shop customers haven't experienced any issues using a universal/global antifreeze, though they have heard of a few cases "where the shop used the global antifreeze to replace DEX-COOL and even though they had no problem, the customer came back complaining that the car dealer told them someone used the wrong antifreeze."

And, Tom Warmuth, general manager at a Parma Heights, Ohio, Rad Air Auto Center says their facilities have been using global coolants on a variety of vehicles and have experienced no problems.

Jim O'Neill, owner of Chino Autotech in California, says on new vehicles, they've noted "absolutely no adverse affects from the use of these aftermarket coolants." He suggests most cooling system failures result from lack of maintenance.

"Problems with corrosion, oxidation and electrolysis in cooling systems usually occur when the coolant has lost its protective additives and/or becomes electrically conductive. These problems occur as often with the approved application-specific coolants as they do with aftermarket products."

A bigger antifreeze issue

Eaton is certain the big aftermarket players are making good products that meet appropriate testing standards. His primary concern is that there has been a rise in coolants that don't meet these standards. "There are some coolants causing major damage and even some vehicle manufacturers are getting lured into buying these problematic fluids. These inexpensive products are getting attention and people are buying (them) without verifying the product's claims." Some of the heavy-duty products Amalgatech has tested contain high contamination levels of corrosive salts, acid and esters, and Eaton says the problem is leaking over to the light truck market as well.

Furthermore, Eaton reveals that there are at least two coolants on the market that don't meet ASTM requirements in spite of their claims, though due to confidentiality, he can't name them, and that there is a large community of no-name recyclers that filter and top dress engine coolants that don't meet the appropriate standards either.

He emphasizes that today's major antifreeze suppliers and advanced technology coolant recyclers go out of their way to distribute quality product, spending tens of thousands of dollars on research and testing.

These are not the coolants the industry needs to be concerned with, he says, suggesting parts distributors pay more attention to some of the no-name products and even recycled coolants being sold today.