160* thermostat?
#21
Tech Resident
by no means will a 160* thermostat destroy your engine. however, it will cut your fuel economy and over time will likely wear your engine more. the key word here is overtime. eventually, all engines wear out and break. a 160* thermostat will simply wear your engine to its eventual demise sooner. how soon is you and my best guess.
i just don't see the extra few hp, if any at all, worth the loss in fuel economy and eventual engine wear, but that's just me. i regretted doing it last time. i wish i had my money back.
i just don't see the extra few hp, if any at all, worth the loss in fuel economy and eventual engine wear, but that's just me. i regretted doing it last time. i wish i had my money back.
#22
Banned
iTrader: (115)
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
worth the loss in fuel economy and eventual engine wear, but that's just me. i regretted doing it last time. i wish i had my money back.
I'm not sure where your proof is. If your using your oil color as proof its not valid in your case given the fact that you run seafoam. I cant argue with you saying you lost gas mileage, I wasnt there. But I do ask did you drive the same way? This is a big question. Most people dont just swap their therm for a performance enhancement in the first place . But then when people do peformance enhancements they tend to drive it a bit more aggresively intentional or not.
Honestly I like to see some real proof in the pudding acurate facts. I'm running a 160 and havent noticed a difference one way or the other that I can really say with certainty.
I'm not trying to be difficult here, I have just never heard anyone say a 160 therm was ruining they're engine.
Also oil being created that can run at higher temps doesnt mean that they aren't effective at a lower temperature. It means it can withstand the highher temps and not breakdown. Runing the engine 10 degrees lower is not going against the properties of the oil and enhancing engine wear.
Show me one shred of real proof from an industry leader and I'll become an instant believer. Like a motor oil company stating that their product will only work properly at a minimum temperature of 195 or what ever temp you want to use between 220 and 160.
Last edited by 99blancoSS; 08-18-2006 at 02:08 PM.
#23
10 Second Club
iTrader: (28)
I'll reiterate:
-10k miles on stock t'stat, 50k miles on 160 stat
-fuel economy stayed exactly the same
-oil temp gets to 225 degrees after 15 mins of driving
-engine internals were spotless at 60k miles
-tranny temps dropped considerably across the board (~10 degrees, very good thing)
-coolant temps stay around 176-184F
Running too cold of a thermostat can do some of the thing's Choco has stated (less efficient burn, yada yada), so his theory is not far off....just his practice. A 160 stat is not too cold for the LS1, and your properly maintained engine will live every bit as long as one with a stock t'stat. Case------closed.
-10k miles on stock t'stat, 50k miles on 160 stat
-fuel economy stayed exactly the same
-oil temp gets to 225 degrees after 15 mins of driving
-engine internals were spotless at 60k miles
-tranny temps dropped considerably across the board (~10 degrees, very good thing)
-coolant temps stay around 176-184F
Running too cold of a thermostat can do some of the thing's Choco has stated (less efficient burn, yada yada), so his theory is not far off....just his practice. A 160 stat is not too cold for the LS1, and your properly maintained engine will live every bit as long as one with a stock t'stat. Case------closed.
#24
Tech Resident
i'm just tellin ya, i saw some negatives but no positives on my '95 V6 firebird. i wish i had my 60 bucks back. it didn't do any good for me. if you guys wanna do it, go ahead, but any gains you 'feel' will likely be in your head. i think IMO you're better off saving your money and putting it toward something else.
#25
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NW Houston, TX
Posts: 10,036
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShevrolayZ28
That's harsh! He's got some truth in there.
#26
TECH Apprentice
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
when you lower the temperature of the engine itself, a few things happen:
1.) you don't heat up the oil enogh to boil the water out. water falls into the bottom of your oil pan and the hotter temperatures are a way of boiling it out. this is why you can run oils today for 3,000+ miles. back in the 60's and so, engines were tuned to run cooler because fluids (coolant, motor oil) broke down very quickly at high temperatures. you had to change your oil every 1,000 miles or so back then. now, the coolant/motor oil doesn't break down til over 250 degrees, so it's best to run the engine hot.
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
2.) your motor will be dirtier running cooler. the detergents in oil are heat activated. in order for them to clean best, they have to reach around 210-215 degrees. running your motor cooler will only keep it dirtier. like i said above, in the 60's, you had to do 1,000 mile oil changes since the engines ran cool and the oil did a poor cleaning job.
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
3.) your motor will wear more since your oil is not doing its job as well and while this will not blow up your motor or anything, overtime it can shorten its life.
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
4.) fuel mileage loss of up to 4 mpg have been made with a 160 degree t-stat. you will likely see a decrease in fuel economy due to a 160* thermostat.
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369
sorry if i'm rambling on, i just don't particularly like the things. i stupidly put one in my old car. i lost fuel economy, felt no performance gains at all and noticed my oil was dirtier than usual on oil changes. never again, never again.
#27
Good post TooSlow02. I think I'll get the 160° stat. lol. I'm going to get a 3000 stall (maybe even higher) and NOT a tranny cooler so hopefully that'll keep my temps what they were before my head swap (194°-196°). And if it's too cold, then it's only $50 for the 180º + $5 for coolant.
#28
10 Second Club
iTrader: (28)
Originally Posted by Somebody09
Good post TooSlow02. I think I'll get the 160° stat. lol. I'm going to get a 3000 stall (maybe even higher) and NOT a tranny cooler so hopefully that'll keep my temps what they were before my head swap (194°-196°). And if it's too cold, then it's only $50 for the 180º + $5 for coolant.
#29
TECH Addict
iTrader: (22)
You're not going to lose 4mpg with a 160 degree thermostat...it's not like the engine is actually running at 160. I had a 160 degree thermo in both of my Z28's because it makes it a touch easier to keep things cooler at the track...both cars were 20 mpg in the city and 30mpg highway.
#30
Trunion King
iTrader: (16)
Originally Posted by keliente
You're not going to lose 4mpg with a 160 degree thermostat...it's not like the engine is actually running at 160. I had a 160 degree thermo in both of my Z28's because it makes it a touch easier to keep things cooler at the track...both cars were 20 mpg in the city and 30mpg highway.
#31
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
So adding a 160* t-stat is ok for our cars...good.
I was hoping to lower temps a bit when I do H/C on mine so I can get by with a bit more compression. Anyone want to comment on what SCR and DCR they've run with lower temperature t-stat's and associated cooling system mods?
I'm assuming M6 cars without tranny coolers, but include that if it's relevant.
I was hoping to lower temps a bit when I do H/C on mine so I can get by with a bit more compression. Anyone want to comment on what SCR and DCR they've run with lower temperature t-stat's and associated cooling system mods?
I'm assuming M6 cars without tranny coolers, but include that if it's relevant.
#36
11 Second Club
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Was New Orleans, but swam to Baton Rouge
Posts: 1,537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TooSlow02
There is absolutely no truth to this. The only thing in oil that's "heat activated" are the expanding polymers that increase viscosity with temperature which allows an oil to be multi-weight. Detergents clean regardless of temperature. Running your engine so cold that it doesn't enter closed loop mode (which is common in the V6 engines, especially the 3.4L) will increase fuel consumption, but that isn't a problem with the LS1 since the actual engine coolant temperature only drops roughly 10-15 degrees F and the PCM doesn't rely solely on coolant temperature as an indicator of actual engine temperature as the older engines did. And the comparison to 60's engines? Complete BS. 60's engines ran dirty because they were carbuerated, ran rich, had no feedback control, no PVC system, very few additives in the oil, shitty (if any) oil filters, shitty fuel filters, shitty air filters, had more combustion pressure blowback, ran on leaded gas, were much much less efficient, and were installed in heavy land barges that put a great deal of load on an engine. The reason today's engines run so much cleaner is simple: over 40 years worth of technological advancements. Not because they ran "cold" (which they didn't).
#38
Originally Posted by FASTCAMAROMAN
i got the 187 not 2 hot for summer or 2 cold for winter just perfect
#39
Trunion King
iTrader: (16)
Originally Posted by Gearhead1
Me too!! A 160 was just too cold for me in the winter. I only live ten miles from work and my car is not garaged. A 160 just wasn't cutting it on those mornings with the temps in the teens. Also, I leave for work at 5AM so there wasn't any warming from the sun going on. Brrrr!!!!