Generation III External Engine LS1 | LS6 | Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust | Ignition | Accessories
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

160* vs 180* Thermostats

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 8, 2002 | 01:15 AM
  #1  
DreamWeaver's Avatar
Thread Starter
On The Tree
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
From: Bakersfield, CA
Default 160* vs 180* Thermostats

Whats the lowdown here. Which is best to go with? Is one better for forced induction or another better for N2O applications???
Reply
Old Dec 8, 2002 | 02:02 PM
  #2  
Fahad's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,124
Likes: 0
From: kuwait
Default Re: 160* vs 180* Thermostats

160* is the way <img border="0" alt="[Burnout]" title="" src="graemlins/burnout.gif" />
Reply
Old Dec 8, 2002 | 02:16 PM
  #3  
SILVER BULLET's Avatar
TECH Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
From: Carlsbad
Default Re: 160* vs 180* Thermostats

160 with it programmed in
Reply
Old Dec 8, 2002 | 03:35 PM
  #4  
Colonel's Avatar
TECH Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 9,246
Likes: 3
From: Troy, AL
Default Re: 160* vs 180* Thermostats

160. It'll run about 176-180 which is perfect for best power, IMO.
Reply
Old Dec 8, 2002 | 03:51 PM
  #5  
ratio411's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
From: Pensacola, FL
Default Re: 160* vs 180* Thermostats

Go to this link and save $50 on your stat!
http://ls1info.com/article.php?sid=180

Don't forget that when you run a stat, you also need to get the fans to come on sooner for it to work. Go here to get an auto fan switch mod that only runs around $20.
http://ls1info.com/article.php?sid=222

Good luck
Dave

Edit: I did both mods, my car runs a consistent 175*.

<small>[ December 08, 2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: ratio411 ]</small>
Reply
Old Dec 9, 2002 | 12:59 AM
  #6  
LS1 JAY's Avatar
TECH Apprentice
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
From: Aub, Fl
Default Re: 160* vs 180* Thermostats

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Renegade:
<strong>Whats the lowdown here. Which is best to go with? Is one better for forced induction or another better for N2O applications???</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">160* is the way to go! I have heard some in the past say that a 160* is too low, but thats BS! GM used the 195* for emission purposes only! My ET's actually improved with a 160* because it stays cooler between runs!
Reply




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:17 PM.