Is a cooler thermostat worth it?
#1
Launching!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Monticello, MN
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is a cooler thermostat worth it?
I'm thinking of going to a cooler thermostat. I was thinking of the Vinci 170 degree version. Currently, my fans are set such that the warmest the car ever gets is 207 degrees. That is with a stock thermostat, in stop-and-go traffic. Normal running temps are 192-194 degrees. Would a cooler running thermostat buy me anything at all? BTW, I have a heads and cam car. Experiences, and opinions, all welcome. thanks! :cheers
Ed
Ed
#5
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (6)
Originally Posted by camaro-man
I thought that if you get your engine running too cool it would cause problems, not help anything. Who knows though I could be wrong!
finally, the best HP is usually seen with water temps of about 160degrees and oil temps of about 210degrees.....
#7
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,362
Likes: 0
Received 1,794 Likes
on
1,278 Posts
Lots of info on this, been discussed in depth and good points made on both sides. Try a search.
Personally, I see no point in running coolant temps any cooler than 185-190 on a stock compression, NA LS1. I've tried it and seen no gains, only a loss in MPG. To each his own......
Personally, I see no point in running coolant temps any cooler than 185-190 on a stock compression, NA LS1. I've tried it and seen no gains, only a loss in MPG. To each his own......
Trending Topics
#10
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,604
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
All in all I'd say you'd do better with stock 'stat,
smart fan settings and a better radiator. Radiator
costs can be low, I snarfed a LT1 rad off eBay for
$25 never-wet (cost less than the shipping). The 160
thermostats demand a -way- better radiator if you
want to keep the temp there, under load with A/C
on. The goal is to minimize temp swing and at high
loads the thermostat is no part of the thermal-dump
limitation.
Better to have rock-solid 195F than a 175-225F
bouncing ball, for tuning it down to the bone.
smart fan settings and a better radiator. Radiator
costs can be low, I snarfed a LT1 rad off eBay for
$25 never-wet (cost less than the shipping). The 160
thermostats demand a -way- better radiator if you
want to keep the temp there, under load with A/C
on. The goal is to minimize temp swing and at high
loads the thermostat is no part of the thermal-dump
limitation.
Better to have rock-solid 195F than a 175-225F
bouncing ball, for tuning it down to the bone.
#11
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cavalier, ND
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had used a Hypertech (now stollen) to set my fans to come on at 180 with a 160-stat inside. I'm getting a Vinci handheld in a few days in the mail but I noticed the lowest temp for fan turn-on is 190 (!)
Will Vinci overwrite Hypertech's coding or will it stack?
Will Vinci overwrite Hypertech's coding or will it stack?
#13
TECH Addict
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: H-Town
Posts: 2,036
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the Hypertech 160* thermostat and have had my fans programed to 180 for the low and 188 for the high speed. I live in Houston, Tx and it gets pretty damn hot here. If I would have lived up north, I probably would have went with a 180* thermostat.