Omega Doom

iTrader: (2)

ok I recently found a leak on my 2002 WS6 after years of flawlles reliabilty and mucho DD so i can expect it well i was wondering if there any upgrades such as last week I put in a truck 04 tahoe alternator to be exact switch was from stock 105 amp to 145 amp so for cooling im researching(from here and friends) and finding that the LT1 radiator is a good upgrade,now there seems to be a debate about 160 and 180 thermostats,now what about water pumps pros vs cons and what about condensers in front of the radiators should they be replaced or just cleaned? what about dex cool vs simple green? I know theres been threads so if you dont want to chime in with positive advice then just move on lol basically im just looking for ideas all bunched up into one thread

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

LT1 is going to offer a little better cooling. I definitely saw a little lower temps when I installed mine almost 10 years ago. PLUS.....if you add a 6" long piece of heater hose to that extra bottom port that we do not need...you get a GREAT flush drain. Then you don't have to use that joke of drain...the factory plastic petcock valve.

There is no debate about 160 or 180......180 will allow more cooling time for the HOT coolant that is in the radiator getting ram air and/or fan cooled......no brainer. It has worked on my 427ci and is now doing great on my IRON 390ci. in HOT AS HELL South Florida weather with my A/C always on.

Clean the condenser once a year. Or just spend the $100 and replace it....its well worth it and makes the job a lot easier. A dirty condenser, or just partially dirty condenser is the leading cause of peoples cars overheating.....and they spend a lot of time chasing the problem and changing other parts to figure out why its running hot.

Dexcool works just fine if the cooling system is 100% sealed like its supposed to be. It will last 5 years easy...... BUT...the green stuff will never get messy and it WILL definitely run cooler. No debate here either....I know many LSx guys that have gone GREEN coolant....and they ALL report cooler temps overall. Im switching mine now too.

.

Omega Doom

iTrader: (2)

thanks bro for the post and i have been reading your post on these type subjects thanks it all helps!

great421

iTrader: (1)

Yep.

Real polyethylene glycol based anti-freeze, not the "Universal" stuff that just happens to be green in colour has a higher coefficient of thermal conductivity - it simply transfers heat better than Dexcool.

Having said that, some will facetiously argue that pure H2O works / transfers heat even better (so why not use it); but that's a different discussion...

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

Yup....myself being down here in South Florida and I don't need anti-freeze because of freezing temps......I always used half jug of Dex for lube and the rest water.
Im gonna go half jug of Green + bottle of water wetter + rest water........

It'll run coooool......

.

Omega Doom

iTrader: (2)

im here in NTX so i may do the same thing

wssix99

iTrader: (5)

Your answer lies within this statement. If you don't have a problem, why would you try to fix one or "upgrade?"

I had a teacher who would always say "There is no such thing as a free lunch." Everything comes at a price, even "upgrading" the alternator.

Bigger equipment, radiator, etc. eats in to the efficiency of the engine, (ie: your gas mileage) changing the temperature does the same, and changing the type of coolant will increase the interval at which you need to change the coolant. (The "issues" people have with the red coolant can be averted with more frequent changes, but you'll have a little extra insurance if you end up going long.)

For a car that is raced, boosted, or treated to abnormal conditions, the cost/benefit of these trade-off's change. But for a DD, I've seen very few modifications that make much sense.


That being said, while you are doing this project, you should definitely change or delete the power steering cooler, if you have one. That one makes a hell-of-a-lotta sense - more so for a DD.

Daniel Richards

iTrader: (1)

I can vouch for some of this, you don't actually want your car to run cooler then it does from the factory because that is where the engine is most efficient, for example switching from a 195 thermostat to a 180 can cause you to lose .5-1 MPG (potentially more in winter months), and while for a weekend cruiser that might not be an issue for a daily driver that sure can add up.

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

^^^ True.

But upgrades are only going to cause temps to run 5-10 degrees F cooler....at best. Tracking my temps for a few weeks after putting in the LT1 radiator like 10 years ago.....showed that I run between 185-190 pretty much all the time. If I put the A/C on during a hot day, in moderate traffic....it would stay around 200-205 at most. If I was stuck in traffic, like stop and go with the A/C on....it would see 210-215 at most....which still isn't too hot for an aluminum LSx.

Before the LT1 radiator......it would shoot up to 220-225 in stop and go traffic with A/C....that's pushing where I ever want to see my temps. And while in moderate traffic it would hover around 205-210....more than I like.

This was 10 years with my 427ci stroker and a 160 tstat........NOW.....since about 5 years ago I put a 180 tstat in and all of those temps stayed at those lower values.....rather than the upper values.

This new iorn 390ci I have......it runs a little hotter near the upper values of those numbers....which really is perfect temps......

If someone tries to run without a tstat in 10*F weather on the highway, then yes, the temps will then be falling to temps where the engine will lose efficiency.

But its like dyno numbers.....those losses of efficiency cant be measured, they are too small and meaningless. When one LSx engine runs at 200*F and the other one runs at 191*F....they will have identical gas mileage, identical power, identical everything..... immeasurable differences.

That's why we should make our engines run as cool as possible with every mod available. Becauae all youre gonna get is about a 10*F overall decrease. And that is a GOOD thing because heat is what kills everything on an engine, even metal parts. Its worth that tiny "Theoretical" loss of efficiency. Like using a paper air filter over a garbage K&N.....yea, they CLAIM to gain some power, but at the cost of letting more particulate matter through the engine, which will destroy the rings and cylinders prematurely, which will really kill the power of an engine.

.

wssix99

iTrader: (5)

We could only say it's "worth it" on a daily driver if the additional costs for parts and the costs for loss of efficiency outweigh a small incremental extension in rebuild intervals. (If there is an extension at all. Once an engine gets to 150K miles, all bets are off for a number of reasons other than heat fatigue.)

Daniel Richards

iTrader: (1)

on my first Accord I added a Ingen Air Intake which used a K&N filter to the car just like a week after I bought the car and it had 150k miles on the motor at that point, I put another 100k on that car before I wrecked it and that motor still ran like a top, so I don't know where your getting this K&N thing from.

But, on topic, I saw those differences in mileage just going between 180* and 195* thermostats, so yes even that 10* or so will effect efficiency on a daily driver, think about it, if you drive 50 miles a day (like me) then even a 1 MPG increase (so about 2-2.5 miles more per day) that equates to about $100 a year (at 25 MPG average, assuming mostly highway) and if your average fuel economy is less then 25 then that number grows considerably.

Omega Doom

iTrader: (2)

my water pump just gave up so thats why i was talking upgrades i do understand what your saying and agree thank you for posting and i was hoping this thread could give us less experienced gearheads some updated info

wssix99

iTrader: (5)

I guess, even if you stay stock, you do get an "upgrade." AC Delco retired the original pump and switched over to the LS2 style a few years back:

https://ls1tech.com/forums/general-m...ater-pump.html

Omega Doom

iTrader: (2)

well my car isnt to stock though its a cammed, full exhaust, stalled car dynoed 414rwhp if that makes any difference

wssix99

iTrader: (5)

No difference, cause you wouldn't need any significantly greater cooling for that.

Some folks who race go to electronic pumps, but that's definitely not the thing for a DD.

dailydriver

Corrected it for you, as road racers generally would not use the electric pumps either.

wssix99

iTrader: (5)

^ thx - that's what I meant to say!

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

Air filters are there for one reason.....to protect your engine from very small debris. This subject with the K&N filters has been beat to death. They offer far LESS protection than any paper filter, even crappy paper filters. They let too much air in to the intake/engine. Yea, it might, after K&N does 10 dyno runs until they get a run that shows a 2hp increase, then they publish that dyno run gain. So overall, they probably pick up .5 hp overall after 10 dyno runs. So they publish to the public that their air filters make hp.....its hilarious. But hey, they sell them.
What you don't realize is that any car that uses a K&N filter is running at less than optimal performance 95% of its life. WHY? Because as soon as you drive through rain, fog, wet roads, etc.....the oils that are used on the K&N filters is reactivated and that oil ends up coating the MAF sensor wires.....and from that day forward till the MAF is cleaned again......you are running with less performance. Dirty MAF = Reduced performance. But when you run like that for years and years....that's what you think normal is and running like a top is. That's also why when most people clean their MAF the first drive feels stronger, more responsive and just plain better. K&N users don't get that feeling.....because even after they clean their K&N periodically as they are supposed to, they don't ALSO clean the MAF on those days.....so they never feel that new found performance......But maybe some people do. Im sure some will claim that they remember to always clean the MAF each time they do the K&N. But even if they do....again, the first time there's any moisture in the air, the MAF gets screwed again.

A few road race teams have done the ultimate test to prove that K&N filters are far less protective than paper filters. They ran a few full races with a paper filter......and a brand new engine. Then they ran the same few races with a K&N with another identical brand new engine. Leakdown checks after each race showed that the K&N filter leaked down more on all 8 cylinders. There's a write-up from a couple race teams that have done this on the web somewhere. They also made ZERO HP using the K&N filters.....over paper. Its just a myth. Its an immeasurable amount of power, if any at all is really happening.

Your engine ran like a top....yes....but with paper filters its entire life it would have also ran like a top.....BUT it would have always made more power and been more responsive.

Now....a K&N with a Speed Density tune and no MAF.....that would be better, but your engine (rings/cylinder walls) would still be getting worn prematurely.


.

fleetmgr

You can filter, or you can flow. Pick one.

LS6427

iTrader: (2)

Exactly....

Id say it like this though:

You can have protection, or you can have the extra immeasurable HP K&N alleges their filters pick up.

Ill go with protection every time....

.