Redline Water Wetter
 

Just replaced my 85/15 percent-distilled water and anti-freeze with distilled/water wetter. I mixed the water wetter 32oz to 1oz of water wetter as what is recommended by Redline and test that I have seen on this topic in forums. It has been 17 hours and I have not seen a change in the temps. Currently as I type and online my temps are, case ambient 26c and cpu temps 36c. A 10c differential is good as my air cooling rig was 16c differential while online.

So is the watter wetter good, bad, or indifferent than the anti freeze?

indifferent... dont buy waterwetter to improve temps, it wont give any btter temps than pure water.. buy it for its other properties, such as anti corrosion and such...

Honestly I did not see an improvement over anti-freeze in lowing the temps. Even though some have claim that water wetter will lower the temps.

It was the tests by bunker mentality that "evidenced" the improvement in temps with wetter water. I never saw an improvement over plain de-ionised water in my setup.

You guys are all using an in socket thermal probe anyways! It's all wrong! ALLLLLLLLLL WRONG!
;)
-kev

I use an inline temp thingy:p :p :p

Wouldln't the delta still be valid? As long as ambient didn't change.

maybe it lowered the temps by a very small (undetected) amount? keep in mind what Water Wetter was designed for - anti-corrosion in race cars (since anti-freeze is illegal (yes, anti-freeze does do more than just keep the coolant from freezing)). it was not designed to lower temps (altho it does...in cars). that part was merely a fluke (a good one, but a fluke non-the-less).

(((i like using parenthesis)))

lol :rolleyes: :p

ambient - actually no. Although I have no clue where at this point, I know that many people have reported deltas to be wrong as well due to inaccurate heat transfer throughout the chip and stuff. Sorry I don't know where I got that info from. But don't trust the probes!
-Kev

Again, whether the MOBO sensor is telling the truth or not it makes NO difference when testing Water wetter/Distilled water or Anti-freeze/Distilled water on the same system. If I report no difference on my computer when using either product and my CPU temps are the same, what’s the argument?

Kevin your argument is about the mobo sensor not reporting correctly. Do you not understand by changing the coolant on the same system made no change in the temps? How much more clearer do you need it explained….

I agree with viper its just a comparison...not a exact temp reading....and mobo probes are fine for that

Does anybody know if products like Water Wetter actually act as a mild biocide? Some people say that it does, others say that it doesnt. The manufacturer's pages don't mention a thing about it, so I'm rather curious as whether I should drop some Listerine (minty, minty, fresh, fresh!) in the res, lol.

i certainly wouldnt put listerine in there lol. water wetter was not designed to act as a biocide or algeacide...:shrug:

First of all, dude, I feel like being an ass to you like you were to me, but I really value the Pro/Forums as a place where this kind of thing doesn't happen so I'm just going to ignore the attitude. Do you really need to wet your panties like that when there is a difference of opinion? Why can't we have a civil discussion?

I think you are assuming that while the mobo temp sensor is not precise, it is consistent. This is where I am saying you are incorrect. They are quite erratic. While we may be saying the same thing here with a misarticulation, this is what I think you are saying. You are saying that the temperature reported is incorrect by a few degrees. However, it should accurately depict temperature swings. This is where I disgaree. Due to the inaccuracy of it, a small change in the system such as the addition of water wetter may or may not go reported by the probe. After all, there is circuitry on the back of Athlon XPs that completely throw off the probe even more. Granted, if you were to turn your radiator fan off, i'm sure the probe temperature reading would increase, but for a small change such as the addition of water wetter, the probe is not valid.

However, I did read someone else saying that they use an inline temp probe. In this case, the results would be more valid.

My argument is not whether water wetter does or does not change temps. My argument is just that the temperature probe under the CPU is not an accurate way of reading this. Are we on the same page in this respect or do you still disagree? If so, I'm definitely willing to hear what you have to say.

Keep it clean,
Kev

First I do not use an XP processor and second my sensor is very accurate on the mobo. As it was check with a Fluke meter with its probe mounted to the underside of my processor. So we still disagree.

Oh and by the way I did check the system before and after with the Fluke meter with the probe in the flow of water and again no temp. changes either. This was done using the T which is inline and sliding the probe into the Silicon tubing until the probe was in the flow of water. Peace :D :D :D

Okay once again though, like I said, I do not disagree with you that the water wetter did not change the temp. Merely that the onboard probe is a horrible way to meaure temp swings. You won't believe it out of my mouth so here:
http://www.overclockers.com/articles306/
If you read further, they talk about how they are quite insensitive to temp swings.
-Kevin

I have to agree with Kevin here about the mobo prob. The very idea of getting an accurate temp by hanging a probe somewhere under the socket can only be full of inaccuracies. The simple act of turning on a case fan could widely effect your readings by the simple change in airflow around the socket. Even an inline will only tell me the change in water temp at the place the probe is. Bad placings will also be effected by other varieables such as air flow.

Bunkermentality's tests showed an improvement of 2c - which as I have said, I was not able to replicate.

Lets backup. First when I put my processor in the socket I insulated the entire area within the socket base. Reason: If I ever decide to use a pelt or use a water cooler to chill the water I needed to shield the area of condensation. So the theory of air moving in and out of the socket does not hold true in my setup. My reported temps are very stable whether running at idled or under load. My ambient temps within the area of my computer are stable as well. Personally I do not notice these wild swings in temps that some of you are reporting. If I run Mother Board Monitor at idled for 24 hours and my ambient temps are stabled, my cpu temps will hold rock solid in this time frame. Everybody’s system is going to be different, but my point is that Water Wetter made no change in cooling my system and I have my doubts it will lower temp’s in any system.

hmm, it probably is just a very small change. besides, waterwetter is generally used as a corrosion inhibitor and to reduce surface tension of the water. if you have enough surface area, it should make a very minimal difference in your temps.

--Matt

It's not mild swings that I notice, but readings that cannot be correct, like when my system is running 2c below ambiant. Trust me, my system is not that good.:rolleyes:

mobo probes are HORRIBLY inaccurate and inconsistent, second of all they are not sensitive enough to tell a small temp improvment. I can aim a fan at my mobo and it will drop 2-3C, which tells you alot about the accuracy, and this is with the inner area of the socket sealed with a neoprene gasket i made. it's been proven that mobo sensors are wrong. I dont doubt that water wetter did nothing, but i KNOW for a fact that mobo probes are wrong.

amen to that, pyro

viper, in your hose setup it looks like there's an upside down T setup coming from the cpu to the rad. where does that hose going up go to? wouldn't that really affect the speed of the waterflow?

Newbie Goku

That T you see is capped off. It is used to fill the system and to bleed the air out. If you look closely you can see a line drawn on the tubing and the waterline slightly below the drawn line on the T.