Replacing thermostat 160
01-05-2011, 12:20 PM
#1
Replacing thermostat 160 I'm getting ready to replace my thermostat with a 160. I saw the how to on install university.. Did you guys really torque down the bolts holding the thermostat?? Or simply tighten them at will?? And how hard will this be?? Seems pretty straight forward .. Any tips ??
Thanks
Thanks
01-05-2011, 12:38 PM
#2
I'm getting ready to replace my thermostat with a 160. I saw the how to on install university.. Did you guys really torque down the bolts holding the thermostat?? Or simply tighten them at will?? And how hard will this be?? Seems pretty straight forward .. Any tips ??
Thanks
Thanks
Put the new t-stat housing on and tighten them down.....3 minutes
I never torque them down by specs, no need. Just tighten them down pretty good, do not go crazy, just normal tight.
.
01-05-2011, 02:02 PM
#3
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Waste of your time and money, because the thermostat
does not control operating temperature on a stock setup
(the fans do) and if you want to run at the thermostat
setpoint, you don't have enough radiator core to do that
reliably (like summer, A/C on, forget maintaining 175F).
The stock 194F ("180") is perfectly fine, more efficient,
and costs nothing performance-wise to leave it be.
does not control operating temperature on a stock setup
(the fans do) and if you want to run at the thermostat
setpoint, you don't have enough radiator core to do that
reliably (like summer, A/C on, forget maintaining 175F).
The stock 194F ("180") is perfectly fine, more efficient,
and costs nothing performance-wise to leave it be.
01-05-2011, 03:38 PM
#5
TECH Regular
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Plain Dealing, LA
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Waste of your time and money, because the thermostat
does not control operating temperature on a stock setup
(the fans do) and if you want to run at the thermostat
setpoint, you don't have enough radiator core to do that
reliably (like summer, A/C on, forget maintaining 175F).
The stock 194F ("180") is perfectly fine, more efficient,
and costs nothing performance-wise to leave it be.
does not control operating temperature on a stock setup
(the fans do) and if you want to run at the thermostat
setpoint, you don't have enough radiator core to do that
reliably (like summer, A/C on, forget maintaining 175F).
The stock 194F ("180") is perfectly fine, more efficient,
and costs nothing performance-wise to leave it be.
Pretty sure the stocker is 187F..
01-05-2011, 04:00 PM
#6
This is it right here. It is a waste of time and money. Not alot of people realise these engines are designed to run at least 190f. This is so moisture in the system can burn off and oil temp can get hot enough to do the same.
But, if the car is driven in hot enough climates where coolant temps will stay at least 190f with a lower t stat then its fine. But even then IMO just leave the stock t stat in and program the fans to come on sooner for hot weather.
01-05-2011, 10:23 PM
#7
12 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ya, when I bought my car about 4 months ago it came with a 160 in it. Now that its cooler at night now, my car barely gets above 160. (I have a 98 so my temp gauge reads actual) I just bought a 187 the other day to put in so the car can at least get to operating temp.
