Coolant Sample Report - Not Good.

[Sky_Boss]

The attached sample report is the coolant from the engine on a 2015 Dutchstar we are in the process of purchasing. The coach has a little over 21,000 miles on it. This is a Freightliner chassis with an ISL9.

I'm looking for opinions on the conclusion of the report.

I don't think this is something to panic over. However, I'm not sure that I simply want them to flush the system and have a rusty component, like the radiator, be in need of replacement to properly solve the problem.

[nothermark]

I think I would just take their advice and re test in 60 days or so. It will be interesting to see what others think...

[barmcd]

I'm no expert by any means, but I don't think a 3 year old coach can have much of a corrosion problem yet. A flush and retest now to establish a baseline would seem to be the way to go. Test it again in a year and see what changed.

Worst case scenario, the radiator has a corrosion issue and fails two years down the road--at least you got two more years service out of it.

[Vanslam]

This may be a case where a warranty may come in handy.

[hohenwald48]

I can offer no opinion regarding the report. I do know I had to replace the radiator (due to leakage) in a Monaco DP back in 2007 or so. The engine was a Cummins ISB and the bill was nearly $5,000. I had it done at a Cummins NW repair facility in Spokane, WA. The original radiator was supplied by Monaco and not by Cummins.

[mackwrench]

A 2015 chassis may have an aluminum radiator with plastic tanks. If that's the case, does it look like the engine has the original OEM water pump, air compressor and egr vavle/cooler?

Any of those components could have failed and cause high zinc & coolant may not have been flushed.

Also noted in the report, transmission heat exchanger and engine oil cooler also could been the source.

Zinc isn't something usually something you see on clyinder liner or engine block.
It could have had a component failure and was "topped" off with incorrect coolant as well....

For sure it requires drain flush and refill with new long life coolant....

[dennis45]

To me this is an odd looking sample report. Personally, I would send it to Spartan or FL (depending on the make) for an opinion since they have likely seen a few of these.
To me it looks like someone has mixed coolant with different additive packs.

[vettenuts]

I would contact both Freightliner and the engine manufacturer to get their input. Too much money and too big a decision to make without some expert input. At least that would be my approach.

[CountryB]

[QUOTE=Sky_Boss;4235795]The attached sample report is the coolant from the engine on a 2015 Dutchstar we are in the process of purchasing. [/QUOTE}

If you really want this coach - show the Seller that report and have them warranty those components listed for another 48 months. If the seller want warranty them, find another coach to buy.

And/or, get another sample done just in case there is an error in the testing.

[60sumtin]

Only 3 years old, 21,000 miles and it needs at the very least a coolant flush already? To me it suggests poor maintenance and/or the previous owner(s?) did not know how to take care of it properly. I'd pass.

[Mr_D]

SCA is 1.1, way too low as I remember.

[mackwrench]

Originally Posted by 60sumtin

Only 3 years old, 21,000 miles and it needs at the very least a coolant flush already? To me it suggests poor maintenance and/or the previous owner(s?) did not know how to take care of it properly. I'd pass.

The coach was built with oat long life coolant, so basically there was no maintenance required at current mileage or age.... so I don't get the poor maintenance talk...
I still suspect a component failure, or wrong coolant added, or something happened roadside that comtaimented coolant and it was just topped off with the original owner thought was all good....

If the rest of coach is good, a flush and refill maybe all it needs.

[Sky_Boss]

I'm pushing my salesperson to ask the current owner (this is a consignment) if there has been some service work done on components that are connected to the cooling systems. I would actually be pleased if something was worked on but the cooling system wasn't properly flushed/serviced afterwards. That would seem to mean that flushing the system now would put things back to normal operations.

I have also sent the results to Freightliner to see if they have any thoughts. I hope they are willing to comment.

Thanks for your opinions!

[Sky_Boss]

I've been pleased with the range of responses. They have helped me work on getting as much info as possible on the whole subject. I'll try to organize my thoughts as best I can.

1. The biggest issue is the zinc. Where did it come from? I've asked my salesperson to contact the owner to see if there is something they want to contribute to the history of the coach.

2. Talking with FCCC I was able to verify that the original coolant is Peak's Fleet Charge pre charged 50/50. With that information JGLubricants re-ran the sample. While it didn't change the values, it did change a couple emphasis items. 4 items are outstanding:

Aluminum 9 ppm low-abnormal (0 would be good)
Zinc 48 ppm critical (0 would be good)
Nitrite 1100 ppm low-abnormal (Not sure best results value but this appears to be on the high side)
SCA 1.1 low abnormal (Should be 1.2 or higher)

3. While the Nitrite level is a tad high it does appear to maintain a high level of protection from cavitation damage to the wet sleeve.

4. The Phosphates level (34 ppm) seem to support one theory that some other coolant or treatment was mixed with the original. The original is advertised as Phosphate Free. Perhaps the Boron level (341 ppm) is also indicative of some other additives used but that is a wild guess.

What do I think is next?

There are no guarantees in life or RVs. We all know that. For that reason (assuming no more surprises) I am buying an ESW with the coach. As I see it, asking for a flushing of the coolant system is reasonably prudent for something to do after buying it. I don't think that would generate any red flags regarding preexisting conditions.

Obviously I will have a full analysis done 60 days after and probably at 6 month then at a year post flush. If they go well then I can do it annually.

Obviously, there could be an underlying condition waiting to bite me in the butt. The hope is that an ESW will soften any impact. OTOH, I hope we find that previous work on components related to the cooling system were worked on and the sample's values are because of that. Or...it could be as simple as poorly managed coolant usage.

It should be noted that neither the oil or transmission samples show any kind of coolant contamination. Nor do they have any red flags.

So...What do you think? I think I'm looking at it from a rational point of view but am I missing something that would change the equation?